Cited by 88Extractivism and Socioeconomic IssuesMining and Resource ManagementSustainable Development and Policies

The dark side of the energy transition: Extractivist violence, energy (in)justice and lithium mining in Portugal

Open access
Canelas, Joana, Carvalho, António·2023·Energy Research & Social Science

Abstract

Focusing on a case study in Northern Portugal, this research mobilizes an energy justice lens to unpack multiple forms of violence reproduced by lithium mining projects, advanced as urgent and necessary for the energy transition. Framed under ‘green transition’ discourses, a ‘corporate energy transition’ follows a mineral-intensive pathway which increases demand for critical raw materials and expands extractivism to new commodities and marginal territories. Lithium (Li) is central to this transition, with an estimated 1500 % rise in the global demand of this rare earth mineral by 2050. Yet, the socio-ecological impacts of Li-mining remain largely overlooked, despite driving significant environmental conflicts in Portugal and elsewhere. Based on empirical research, this article examines how Li-mining projects in Portugal reproduce distributive, recognition and procedural (in)justices which assist the ‘green grabbing’ and infrastructural colonization of peripheral territories, turned into new ‘green sacrifice zones’. By attending to the voices and experiences of those resisting Li-mining projects, the results present the energy transition as a ‘trojan horse’ for extractivism, with Li-mining driving multiple energy injustice(s), reproducing violence against local communities and disrupting wider multispecies relationalities in traditionally sustainable rural territories. The research contributes to: (1) unravel the empirical contradictions of a corporate energy transition, problematizing hegemonic socio-technical responses to address the climate crisis, which expand extractivism through depletion, segregation and exclusion; and (2) reveal links between energy (in)justices and the constitution of ‘green sacrifice zones’, highlighting how territorial struggles embed a clash between different relational ontologies in more-than-human territories.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.erss.2023.103096

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Canelas, J., & Carvalho, A.
Affiliations
Centro de Estudos Sociais (PT)
Corresponding author
Canelas, Joana
Venue
Energy Research & Social Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-06
Volume
100
Pages
103096
ISSN
2214-6296 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4376891012
Cited by
88
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 3
FWCI
37.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Energy Research & Social Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • ERDF (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-028362)
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-028362, 028362)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Extractivism and Socioeconomic Issues
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Mining and Resource Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Sustainable Development and Policies
Keywords
lithium mining, energy justice, extractivism, energy transition, green grabbing, critical raw materials, environmental conflicts, territorial struggles

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review