Selected social impact indicators influenced by materials for green energy technologies

The global shift to green energy is essential. Governments, businesses, and communities are adopting renewable technologies to reduce carbon emissions and promote sustainability. However, one important question often gets overlooked: What are the social risks of the green energy transition?
Like

Share this post

Choose a social network to share with, or copy the URL to share elsewhere

This is a representation of how your post may appear on social media. The actual post will vary between social networks

While the environmental benefits of renewable energy are well-known, the social impacts of transitioning to green technologies require more attention. The materials that power this shift—used in wind turbines, solar panels, and EV batteries—carry significant social risks. These include unsafe working conditions in mining operations and even child labor in certain regions. It’s crucial to understand the social implications of the materials driving the green transition.

Renewable energy technologies have rapidly transformed our economy and society, offering a hopeful alternative to fossil fuels and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, the impacts of these technologies don’t end with environmental benefits. We must also ask: How do they affect the workers in their supply chains?

Workers involved in mining, processing, and assembling materials for green technologies often face hazardous conditions. Unfortunately, these social issues are rarely discussed in conversations about green energy. Our research aimed to evaluate the social impacts of materials like rare earth elements, nickel, cobalt, lithium, silicon, and zinc—focusing on workplace safety, child labor, informal employment, and gender equality.

Our Findings

Our research revealed significant contrasts between the social benefits and risks of the materials used in green technologies such as wind turbines, solar panels, and EVs.

On the positive side, materials like aluminum—widely used in EVs, solar panels, and wind turbines—offer substantial social benefits. Aluminum production creates jobs and stimulates economic growth, particularly in developing countries where demand for renewable energy technologies is rising. Solar photovoltaic (PV) technologies, for instance, generate significant employment opportunities, helping to reduce poverty and improve local economies. However, despite its social benefits, aluminum production comes with environmental trade-offs, as it is highly polluting. This creates a tension between social and environmental goals: while aluminum boosts local economies, its environmental impact poses sustainability challenges.

On the other hand, cobalt and lithium, essential for EV batteries and energy storage, present serious social risks. Cobalt mining, particularly in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), has been linked to hazardous working conditions, including child labor, informal employment, and poor safety standards. These risks are especially pronounced in regions with weak labor regulations and inadequate protections for workers. Lithium extraction also raises concerns about unsafe labor practices, but it additionally poses significant environmental risks, such as water depletion in regions where it is mined.

These issues are deeply concerning when evaluated against global social priorities, such as the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which emphasize reducing poverty (SDG 1), promoting gender equality (SDG 5), and ensuring decent work and economic growth (SDG 8). Without addressing these social and environmental impacts, the green energy transition risks undermining these objectives.

The key tension lies in the trade-offs between social and environmental benefits. While materials like aluminum drive economic growth, their environmental footprint cannot be ignored. Similarly, materials like cobalt and lithium are indispensable for green technologies but are often associated with human rights violations and environmental degradation. This raises an important question: Can the green energy transition be genuinely sustainable if it continues to rely on materials sourced under such harmful conditions?

For a truly sustainable transition, we must confront these social and environmental dilemmas, seeking alternatives and ensuring that the shift to green energy benefits all stakeholders, not just the environment.

 Toward a More Just Transition

To ensure that the green energy transition benefits both the environment and society, we need to take several steps forward.

One approach is material substitution, where we reduce or eliminate the use of high-risk materials like cobalt, lithium, and zinc. Advances in battery technology could minimize reliance on cobalt, reducing social risks in the EV industry. Prioritizing research into safer, sustainable materials will be crucial to making sure the benefits of the green energy transition are more evenly distributed.

Strengthening global labor standards is also critical. Countries and companies must ensure that labor regulations protect workers’ rights, guarantee fair wages, and provide safe working conditions. Governments, corporations, and international organizations must collaborate to enforce these standards, particularly in industries supplying materials for renewable energy.

Finally, corporate responsibility must be a priority. Companies involved in the green energy transition need to take full responsibility for their supply chains, ensuring that the materials they use are ethically and sustainably sourced. Increasing transparency, accountability, and fair trade certifications will help protect workers and communities in resource-rich regions. Ethical sourcing needs to become a top priority to avoid exploiting vulnerable populations.

 Final Thoughts: Green Energy, But at What Cost?

The transition to renewable energy is essential for tackling climate change, but we cannot ignore the social risks that come with it. A truly "green" transition requires us to consider not only the environmental benefits but also the social impacts of the materials we depend on.

While some materials used in green technologies offer significant social benefits, others pose serious risks that cannot be ignored. To create a sustainable future, we must work toward a just transition—one that protects the rights and well-being of workers, safeguards vulnerable communities, and upholds human rights.

By addressing the social risks embedded in the supply chains of green technologies, we can build a renewable energy future that benefits not just the environment but also the people whose labor and resources make this future possible.

The green energy transition must go beyond environmental sustainability. We must ensure that the path we take toward a cleaner future is both socially responsible and ethically sound. Only by addressing both environmental and social concerns can we create a world that truly benefits everyone.

Contributors to this blog:

Saeed Rahimpour and Andrzej Kraslawski

Press this link to read the full article.

Please sign in or register for FREE

If you are a registered user on Research Communities by Springer Nature, please sign in

Follow the Topic

Industries
Humanities and Social Sciences > Business and Management > Industries
Sustainability
Research Communities > Community > Sustainability

Related Collections

With collections, you can get published faster and increase your visibility.

Antimicrobial resistance: a silent pandemic

With this collection, Nature Communications, Nature Medicine, Communications Medicine and Scientific Reports aim to publish research articles spanning the breadth of AMR and across microbial pathogens (bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites). This includes, and is not limited to epidemiological monitoring of resistance incidence in clinical and environmental settings, novel strategies aiming to combat or prevent AMR (i.e. drug repurposing, drug synergy treatment, and vaccines), improvements in diagnostics, and subsequently tailored treatment, of drug-resistant infections.

Publishing Model: Hybrid

Deadline: Mar 31, 2025

Carbon dioxide removal, capture and storage

In this cross-journal Collection, we bring together studies that address novel and existing carbon dioxide removal and carbon capture and storage methods and their potential for up-scaling, including critical questions of timing, location, and cost. We also welcome articles on methodologies that measure and verify the climate and environmental impact and explore public perceptions.

Publishing Model: Open Access

Deadline: Mar 22, 2025