The lurking costs oF green technology metals in a global market

AuthorWinfield J. Wilson
PositionJ.D. Candidate 2011 and M.P.P. Candidate 2012, at American University, Washington College of Law and School of Public Affairs
Pages14-14
14SPRING 2011
As the global market fa ces the challenge of responding
to climate change, including how to convert to a green
economy that use s renewable resources, it is critical
to examine dom estic and international legal frameworks impli-
cated at various points in the life cycle of metallic ore resources
employed in “clea n” or “green” technol ogy.1 Although the
products themselves may o r may not be environmentally-sound
because of their source productio n or their transfo rmation into
waste at the end of their life, consumer demand for the green
labeling wil l continue to drive the production of such technol-
ogy.2 Internat ional law and policy frameworks must take into
account t he consequences of envi ronmental “solu tions” by
negotiating protective measures against the pollu tion create d
at various stages of the life cycle of these metals and creati ng
incentives to induce responsible trade practices to prevent a
“race to the bottom” by governments willing to mine, process,
and ultimately dispose of spent materials.
Lithium and a suit e of metals in th e lowest rows of the
periodic table, called rare Earth elements, are valuable in a
wide r ange of ind ustrial and commercial applicatio ns, includ-
ing emerging green technologies.3 In nearly all stages in the life
cycle production of these metals there are energy intensive and
polluting processes used, from mining and smelting to recycling
and waste management .4 Furthermo re, global climate change
concerns drive how various metals are supplied, used, and ulti-
mately regulated.5 Trade in t he raw materials used in green
technology is, for better or worse, spurred by and responding
to technological solutions that are perceived as tools to mitigate
greenhouse gas emissions.
Against a global backdrop of increasing trade in particu-
lar metallic resources,6 at the d omestic level, the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) regulates hazardous
air pollutants under various mandates found in the Clean Air Act
(“CAA”).7 The EPA’s use of the CAA has com e under increas-
ing scrutiny and attention in regard to the authori ty to regulate
carbon dioxide,8 but the CAA has long served as the vehicle for
regulating other pollutants with transboundary effects, includ-
ing some metals, and current proposed rulemaking demonstrates
this commitment.9
At the international level, various treaties address the long-
range air po llutants r elated to particular industrial sources.10
The United Nations Environment Programme (“UNEP”) treaty
negotiati ons on me rcury and the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe (“UNECE”) Convention on Long-range
Transboundary Air Pollutio n (“LRTAP”) offer frameworks to
THE LURKING COSTS OF GREEN TECHNOLOGY
METALS IN A GLOBAL MARKET
by Winf‌ield J. Wilson*
* Winf‌ield J. Wilson is a J.D. Candidate 2011 and M.P.P. Candidate 2012, at
American University, Washington College of Law and School of Public Affairs.
address energy productio n and specif‌ic indust rial p rocesses,
but a re not universa lly-recognized, nor does eith er framework
address the market for the metals used in green technology.11
While U.S. and intern ational regulations address so me of
the issues presented by trade i n the metals demande d by green
technology, none are a dequate. Investment and development in
extracting an d marketing the rare Earth ele ments are growing,
predominantly in Asia, where industrialization and the availabil-
ity of many of these c ommodities allow for this rapid expan -
sion.12 China dominates as the world leader in rare Earth supply,
processing, and export, but competition is springing up in other
countries, including Malaysia13 and the United States.14
The global tra de in metals, including th e rare Earth ele-
ments, requires fur ther internatio nal and multilateral nego tia-
tion t o promote th e development of this industr y in a socially
and environmentally responsible manner. A bilateral agreement
may be particularly appropriate to address the issue between the
United States and China. China is both the largest producer and
consumer of rare Earth metals; the United States is the next larg-
est di rect consumer, a s well as the primary indirect cons umer
through imports of products made with the metals from China.15
In other words, U. S. demand for elec tronic technologie s pro-
duced by China plays a crucial role in the global market for these
metals. Therefor e, it is only appropriate t hat the United States
play an equivalent role in mitigating the environmental effects
for which it is directly and indirectly responsible.16
On a broader and more comprehensive “cradle to grave”
approach for rare Earth metals, a multilateral agreement may be
appropriate and timely.17 A multilateral approach will allow for
the integration and harmonization of international oversight and
regulation of the global market’s supply and deman d of thes e
metals, keeping their environmental footprint in step with other
multilateral environmental agreements. It is time for the interna-
tional negotiations on climate change, hazardous and radioactive
waste management, and long-range air pollution to be reconciled
with the global markets’ response to them, particularly in regard
to the suite of useful but potentially dam aging metals used in
green technology.
Endnotes: The Lurking Costs of Green Technology Metals in a
Global Market on page 38

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT