With over one hundred million electric vehicle (EV) batteries expected to be nearing retirement by the early 2030s, governments around the world have an urgent window of opportunity to decide: will these batteries become the backbone of a rapid, equitable, just energy transition — or risk becoming part of a next wave of e-waste landing in the Global South?

A new frontier for battery policy: intelligently sequencing second-life before recycling

Second-life policy that can extend a used EV battery’s life by 10 or more years is one of the most promising and least mature frontiers in the global battery landscape. Around the world, EV deployment is accelerating, but the policies governing what happens to those batteries at end-of-life lag behind. 

In most regions, when policies go beyond transport electrification, the focus remains narrowly on recycling — a promise to recover metals to feed the next generation of production. While recycling is an important step in material recovery, adopting only this single-track approach risks prematurely shredding batteries that still hold 70–80% of their capacity, discarding not only valuable materials, but also the embedded emissions that went into their manufacture.

What is more, recycling technologies for EV batteries are still maturing; many technical and economic challenges must be overcome to achieve advertised recovery rates at scale, and to minimize air, water and toxicity hazards for the environment, workers and frontline communities. 

Supporting second-life use does not mean abandoning recycling targets; it means sequencing them intelligently. Policies should require a “next best use” assessment in line with the zero waste hierarchy: first, consider reuse; then repurposing; and recycling only when no higher-value option remains. 

Repurposing viable EV batteries — for a “second life” — as stationary storage to capture the intermittent energy produced by solar panels and wind turbines can extend the batteries’ useful life by 10 or more years. This in turn reduces demand for new materials and batteries, provides greater greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions savings than directly going to recycling, and supports delivering affordable renewable energy to communities who may otherwise be priced out of the clean-energy transition.

To unlock that second life potential, we need coherent, enabling policies that value repurposing of viable batteries before premature recycling.

China is likely the only country today with a dedicated second-life policy. Though even there, an extensive informal recycling and waste sector competing for used batteries risks complicating implementation of official state policy. In the EU, the Batteries Regulation is one of the few policies that attempts to cover all stages of the battery life cycle — from design to repurposing, battery passports and recycling. While this comprehensive scope is laudable, the EU Batteries Regulation also took years to develop, and practical mechanisms for its implementation are still emerging.

Elsewhere, most discussion on national frameworks often falls back on Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) rules typically written for waste management, not for repurposing. This mismatch stifles entrepreneurship. For example, small-scale start up repurposing firms can face onerous fire-safety certifications dependent on access to proprietary Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) data, as is the case in the US.

Other barriers to repurposing include restrictive waste classifications, and limited access to battery data. The result is a policy vacuum where profit and privileged OEM contracts — rather than sustainability goals centering people and the environment — tend to determine a battery’s fate.

Why second-life matters for the Global South

The Global North’s unregulated battery waste has implications for the Global South. While transportation cost and logistics hinder effective end-of-life collection and waste management, used EVs and end-of-life batteries retain significant monetary value. This drives exports to the Global South where less expensive labor and weak regulations lead to risky repairs, informal disposal, pollution, and high safety risks and environmental harms.

Many EV batteries are functionally non-repairable due to proprietary parts and a lack of access to information, turning them into hazardous waste. This worsens risks of waste colonialism and presents a lost opportunity for furthering a just and equitable transition. Weak enforcement of transboundary waste rules allows shipments of low-quality used batteries under the guise of “reusable goods,” while countries with limited regulatory capacity shoulder the safety and environmental risks.

At the same time, these same regions stand to benefit from distributed energy storage powered by repurposed batteries — providing backup for health centers, schools, and community microgrids using stored energy from solar panels and wind turbines. Enabling  the expansion of viable distributed energy storage systems powered by repurposed batteries requires robust collection and transportation logistics, strong safeguards for traceable exports, and local refurbishing capacity grounded in equity principles.

Binding bilateral and multilateral agreements could ensure strong accountability for exported batteries, while local downstream supply chain actors (such as importers, distributors, producers and others) — responsible for safe collection, assessment, and eventual disposal by “return to sender” — can keep both responsibility and economic opportunity closer to home.

The data barrier

Assessing a used EV battery’s viability for repurposing depends in large part on access to battery data, including its specifications, its chemistry, structural configuration, state of health, and history of use. Yet today, OEMs tightly guard access to this data, even when it’s essential for safe disassembly, remanufacturing, repurposing, recycling and battery end-of-life. 

Without transparency, emergency crews, dismantlers, repurposers, and recyclers are left blindfolded — disassembling packs at high cost and risk to personal health and safety. GAIA members in the Philippines have seen first-hand how this lack of access to battery data can lead to grave risks in informal settings.  

Embedding repurposing into battery waste policy

Without deliberate policy intervention, the risk is high that most retired EV batteries will flow into closed-loop recycling systems controlled by a few large corporations, and feed waste colonialism. If national and multi-lateral policies continue to lag, we risk turning a cornerstone of the clean-energy transition into a new form of extractive waste trade.

But if policymakers and automakers act now — aligning design, data, and governance — second-life batteries can become an important connective tissue between transport electrification and energy access, between climate mitigation and social justice. By embedding reuse and repurposing into the core of battery policy and design, governments and industry can help deliver on electrification that doesn’t end with the first charge.

*This blog was originally published on the GAIA website.

The post Don’t Waste the Charge: Why Second-Life Batteries Deserve a Strong Policy Framework first appeared on Communities First.

AngloGold Ashanti has agreed to pay damages to the communities of Area One who were forcibly evicted from their land for the gold mine’s expansion in 2015. This is the first such victory in Guinea.

In the wake of the violence, local and international civil society organizations mobilized to support the communities who had been violently forced to move from their land in 2015 for the expansion of the Siguiri gold mine project, operated by a Guinea-based subsidiary of AngloGold Ashanti.

Watch the video : Securing Justice for Forced Displacement from the Siguiri Gold Mine

A minefield journey since the eviction

When we began our struggle, nobody believed we would get anything from this company and we were told to give up, but we persisted and today we can hold our heads high again”, said Balla Camara, the courageous community leader of Area One who dared to call for accountability.

Guinea is a politically unstable country with a hostile environment for human rights defenders, and a repressive government most often opting to protect the interests of mining companies, such as AngloGold Ashanti, the country’s leading gold producer, rather than the people.

Established in the Siguiri region for more than 800 years, these 365 families – artisanal miners, traders and farmers – were violently evicted and arbitrarily arrested by the State security forces. They were then made to seek temporary lodging elsewhere for years, and finally resettled while still seeing their health, education and livelihoods in danger. Many other violations of national and international law occurred, but little hope for justice were provided. Avenues for legal recourse in Guinea are nearly nonexistent with a poorly functioning judiciary in a country rife with corruption.

Following the money and tireless community solidarity, keys to victory

The evicted communities sought the advice of local NGO Commerce International pour le Développement (CECIDE), who had long been supporting the human rights of communities in the Siguiri area.

CECIDE mobilized its network including local lawyers at Mêmes Droits Pour Tous (MDT) and international partners, including Advocates for Community Alternatives (ACA) and The 11^th Hour Project. With little possibility of legal redress in Guinea, Inclusive Development International (IDI) was brought in to follow the money that paid for the gold mine’s expansion: AngloGold Ashanti received a loan from the South African bank Nedbank, which in turn had received financing from the International Finance Corporation (IFC).

Watch the video : Beneath the Surface: Leveraging the Power of Investors

This meant the IFC’s environmental and social performance standards applied to the Siguiri mine’s expansion. It opened the door for the affected communities, with support from CECIDE, MDT and IDI, to file a complaint in April 2017 to the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman (CAO) of the World Bank Group. The CAO is the independent accountability mechanism for projects supported by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA).

The community’s complaint to the CAO led to a six-year long mediation process among the company and affected communities, with support from the NGOs, leading to a series of incremental wins and now a final settlement agreement.

This struggle for accountability is the product of years of hard work, dedication and persistence by local human rights defenders, continuously strengthening community solidarity, working to mobilize for rights in a hostile environment.

A victory that restores hope

Guinea is well known for its abundance of natural resources. The country has one of the world’s largest reserves of bauxite. This is the main material used to produce aluminum, a transition mineral important to moving away from fossil fuels. Mega mining projects are being initiated with the aim of boosting the country’s economy, such as the Simandou project for its so-called green steel. However, the promises of development often fail to be realized for the thousands of people living from the land’s resources sacrificed for these projects. Communities are very often forced to leave their homes either because they are forced out by the authorities, without any real resettlement or compensation, or driven away because the pollution caused by the projects threatens their health and livelihoods.

The Area One settlement agreement is an exceptional victory and a source of hope for the thousands of people who suffer the damages of investment projects in Guinea every day. Community tenacity over many years – despite threats and intimidation from government and the company – made this possible,” said Lien De Brouckere, advisor with The 11^th Hour Project since the start of this campaign, including the fact-finding mission in 2016 that laid the basis for the CAO complaint.

A part of the agreement’s significant financial settlement amount will be directly given to the affected families as individual compensation, and another part will be used to set up a fund to finance development and livelihood restoration projects implemented by the affected families.

The post Guinea: Long awaited justice for communities forcibly evicted for the Siguiri gold mine first appeared on Communities First.

This guide is written for local CSOs, human rights defenders and community rights advocates in Africa and beyond. “Biashara Na Haki” Part 2 focuses on practical tools and steps to identify business and human rights impacts and obtain remedy. The guide encourages a constructive approach to engagement that favours collaborative strategies such as negotiation and joint problem solving, and campaigning where necessary.

The guide is a co-creation by me, Jeroen de Zeeuw, Rose Kimotho and Caitlin Pierce.

The post Co-Creator of Amnesty International toolkit on Business & Human Rights first appeared on Communities First.

The SAGE Fund – Strengthening Accountability in the Global Economy – is a collaborative foundation seeking to seed innovative approaches to corporate accountability in the global economy. I will be advising and supporting SAGE Fund to assess and engage their existing and potential grantees on identifying and using new tools and strategies, and supporting them with connections to new and existing technical and other partners to help them reach their goals of advancing human rights in today’s globalized economy.

This advisory work with SAGE Fund complements my existing work with The 11th Hour Project, the grant-making arm of the Schmidt Family Foundation, advising the 11th Hour Project’s human rights program on implementing its strategy in Guinea related to industrial mining’s devastating impacts, and  providing key facilitation and technical support for more effective implementation. 

The post Joining SAGE Fund as an Advisor first appeared on Communities First.

(March 8, 2019 – Conakry) – Residents of 13 villages in western Guinea have filed a formal complaint against the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the World Bank’s private-sector arm, for funding the expansion of a harmful bauxite mine. The 540 complainants allege that the IFC-financed project, Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée, has grabbed their land, destroyed their livelihoods and damaged the local environment.

The complaint, filed with the IFC’s independent watchdog, the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, details violations of the IFC’s environmental and social Performance Standards and international law. Most of the world’s development banks have established such grievance mechanisms to monitor compliance with their environmental and social policies and address complaints from impacted communities.

The complainants are seeking full and fair redress for the harms they have suffered, along with protection from future violations. They have asked the Compliance Advisor Ombudsman to facilitate mediations with the IFC and Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée to address their grievances.

“The lands on which we and our ancestors have lived and farmed for centuries have been almost totally consumed by CBG,” said Mamadou Lamarana Bah, one of the complainants.  “With no more land, no more forests, no more water, how are we going to survive?

The villagers have lost agricultural land, which has led to a significant decline in their incomes and quality of life, and access to their water resources, which have been polluted, among other harmful impacts. The situation is especially perilous for the residents of Hamdallaye village, who have been told by the company that they will be imminently resettled, without their consent, in a former mining area that was not properly rehabilitated.

The complainants are being represented by two Guinean organizations, Centre du Commerce International pour le Developpement (CECIDE) and Association pour le développement rural et l’entraide mutuelle en Guinée (ADREMGUI), and the U.S. human rights organization Inclusive Development International.

The impoverished nation of Guinea is home to the world’s largest bauxite reserves. Mining companies have flooded the country in recent years, despite serious social and environmental concerns raised by Human Rights Watch and others. Bauxite mined by Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée is processed into aluminum that is used by major consumer brands to make cars, beverage cans and technology. Yet few Guineans benefit from such projects.

“International mining companies have been making a fortune off of Guinea’s rich mineral resources, while the communities impacted by mining have quite literally been left in the dust,” said Mathilde Chiffert, West Africa Legal Coordinator for Inclusive Development International.  “It’s high time for local communities to get a fair share of the benefits from mineral extraction.”

Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée is a joint venture between the Guinean government; the U.S. aluminum corporation Alcoa; the Anglo-Australian mining giant Rio Tinto; and the Guernsey-registered Dadco. In 2016, the IFC provided a $200 million loan to expand the venture’s mining operations, with the U.S. government’s Overseas Private Investment Corporation providing an additional $150 million.

A further $473 million came from a syndicate of commercial banks: France’s Société Générale, BNP Paribas, Crédit Agricole and Natixis; the German affiliate of ING bank, ING-DiBa; and two Guinean banks, Société Générale de Banques en Guinée and Banque Internationale pour le Commerce et l’Industrie de la Guinée, a member of the BNP Paribas group.

The German government guaranteed a portion of the financing through its Untied Loan Guarantees program.

Since it began operations in 1973, Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinée has mined large areas of land in the area surrounding the town of Sangaredi, located in the lush Boké region. For years, the joint venture has denied the land rights of local communities, creating immense frustration among the population.

“We look forward to engaging in an equitable dialogue process with CBG, facilitated by an independent mediator to resolve the long-standing grievances of the complainants,” said Tenguiano Pascal, Executive Director of CECIDE.

The complaint is available at:

In English: https://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/CBG_CAO-Request-for-Mediation_FINAL-EN.pdf

In French: https://www.inclusivedevelopment.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/CBG_CAO_Request-for-Mediation_FINAL-FRE.pdf

For further reading, see:

“What Do We Get Out of It?” The Human Rights Impact of Bauxite Mining in Guinea, Human Rights Watch, October 2018

The post Thirteen Guinean villages lodge complaint against World Bank for financing destructive bauxite mine first appeared on Communities First.

I recently returned from joining the Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide (ELAW) for their 2018 Annual International Meeting and the African Public Interest Environmental and Human Rights Law conference in Arusha, Tanzania. The meetings brought together more than 100 people, and were co-hosted by Lawyers’ Environmental Action Team (LEAT) and the Association for Law and Advocacy for Pastoralists (ALAPA).

This was a wonderful way to meet ELAW’s grassroots advocates from 42 countries, especially those from the African continent, including Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, South Africa, Swaziland, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

The environmental issues these defenders address range from land grabs, to extractive industries, climate change and more. Beyond ELAW partners, the Goldman Environmental Prize brought truly inspiring Prize winners from across Africa to participate as well.

I’ve recently started work as a francophone attorney with ELAW on a consultant basis, and had the pleasure of meeting my ELAW team members from the US and DRC.

The post Joining environmental defenders in Tanzania first appeared on Communities First.

The video below will start at my remarks.

The post Speaker at East Africa Oil and Gas Conference: Has it Gone Bust Before the Boom? first appeared on Communities First.

While the training covered the gamut of topics ranging from land to conflict, from environmental impact assessment to amicus briefs in investor-State arbitration, and a range of advocacy strategies, one topic unquestionably stole the show and captured participants’ hearts and minds: following the money. I was only too happy to share the formidable work of Inclusive Development International (IDI) on making investment chain mapping and financier advocacy more accessible to more local communities, grassroots activists and NGOs.

The post Corporate Accountability with UCCA in Uganda first appeared on Communities First.