Note: 90 Miles from Needles will be on a brief hiatus until July 9.
Corporate Exploitation: The Case of Rover Critical Minerals
Key Takeaways
Environmentalists are increasingly recognizing the value of desert ecosystems and advocating for their protection.
Corporate exploitation of desert resources is a modern example of colonialism.
Sustainable energy solutions should consider the ecological and cultural significance of the targeted lands.
The Dire Situation in Amargosa Valley
Rover Critical Minerals is attempting to mine lithium in Amargosa Valley NV, posing a severe threat to the local ecosystem and community. Chris Clarke, host of 90 Miles from Needles; The Desert Protection Podcast, provides a detailed account:
"Rover has also filed 400 plus mining claims within the community, right across the road from people's houses. This is widely seen as an affront to the people there, if for no other reason, then people rely on their well water without well water, you can't live there."
The implications are dire. The groundwater, essential for both human life and the unique ecosystem of Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, could be depleted. As Clarke explains, drilling new water wells is not only expensive but also uncertain, putting the entire community at risk.
Uniting Diverse Groups Against a Common Threat
One of the most striking aspects of this conflict is how it has united a wide range of stakeholders, from local residents to environmental organizations and indigenous tribes. Clarke notes:
"Their actions have united the Amargosa Conservancy, which I'm on the board of, with local residents in Amargosa Valley and nearby communities whose politics span the spectrum from full-on QAnon to full-on Marxist."
This broad coalition demonstrates the universal recognition of the desert's value and the collective opposition to its exploitation. It’s a powerful reminder that common environmental threats can bridge even the widest ideological divides.
Environmental Regulation and Corporate Tactics
Corporate representatives like Judson Culter, PR flak for Rover Critical Minerals, often try to frame local opposition as irrational or influenced by competing interests.
“Culter said ‘They don't want anybody here. Whether it's an oil and gas lobby that's behind that, who knows? It's hard to say, but it doesn't make any sense.’”
This tactic of discrediting local voices reveals a deep disconnect between corporate ambitions and community welfare, highlighting the need for more inclusive and transparent environmental regulation.
Human Supremacy and Environmentalism
The podcast episode also critiques the overarching philosophy driving many environmental initiatives that focus solely on renewable energy without considering the ecological or cultural costs. Rebecca Wisent, quoted in the episode, captures this sentiment perfectly:
"The conversation now is almost entirely about ways to handle climate change without changing how we live. There's an overwhelming current of utilitarianism that demands we, for example, set aside our love for a place should it require paving with solar panels in order to power x number of homes. That’s not environmentalism. That’s human supremacy."
This notion of "human supremacy" underlines many misguided environmental efforts. It’s not enough to swap fossil fuels for renewable energy if it means obliterating irreplaceable ecosystems in the process. Sustainable solutions must consider the long-term health of both human and natural communities.
The Value of Conservation and Sensible Energy Policies
Clarke emphasizes the need for a balanced approach to energy consumption and conservation. Instead of compromising precious habitats, why not rethink our energy usage?
"Shouldn't leaving your lights on when you're not home be as anathema as smoking next to kids or driving after eight beers have become?"
This question calls for a shift in societal norms around energy consumption. Advocating for education and policy changes that promote conservation can yield significant benefits without sacrificing environments.
A Colonialist Approach to Resource Extraction
The transcript draws a parallel between modern energy companies and historical colonialists, showing how the former often disregard the well-being of local communities and ecosystems. Clarke summarizes this approach:
“Sorry, we need to come in and completely remake the place where you live in order for our lifestyle somewhere distant to benefit.” That is the definition of colonialism, and that's what the desert is facing.
This perspective sheds light on how energy corporations and even some environmental advocates can perpetuate colonialist practices by prioritizing their needs over the local populace and environment. It's crucial to recognize and address these dynamics to foster genuinely sustainable and ethical development practices.
Learning from the Past: David Brower and Glen Canyon
The story of David Brower and Glen Canyon serves as a historical reminder of the consequences of prioritizing distant benefits over local ecosystems. Brower initially agreed to compromise Glen Canyon to save other areas, but he later realized the immense value of what was lost.
This narrative underscores the importance of firsthand experience and understanding the intrinsic value of natural places before making irrevocable decisions. Modern environmental efforts must learn from such mistakes to avoid repeating them.
Insights
We must adopt a more nuanced approach to energy and environmental policy that respects and integrates the voices of local communities and environmental advocates. Sustainable solutions should not come at the cost of irreplaceable habitats and cultural sites. By recognizing the intrinsic value of places like the Amargosa Basin, we can develop more ethical and effective strategies for tackling the climate crisis.
Completely agree we need to massively reduce energy use; adding new kinds of energy to total energy supplies just grows the system, which then requires more energy to maintain. York and Bell showed that so-called "renewables" are additive and do not replace fossil fuels when viewed at the global scale. And many have shown that shifting from a fossil fuel-intensive energy system to a materials-intensive energy system will create skyrocketing demand for many materials, including lithium, copper, nickel, and so on. We won't save the planet by destroying it, that's for sure. And of course climate change is just one of many symptoms of ecological overshoot, and by far, the collapse of biosphere integrity, with habitat loss, species loss, overall wildlife numbers plummeting, is the worst of these many symptoms. The polycrisis is here, and more energy, no matter how it's generated, will only make that worse.