The Green Metal Dilemma: Can We Decarbonize Without Sacrificing Nature?

Nguyen Phuong Tri

Nguyen Tat Thanh University

16-05-2026

© Wix

The global transition toward renewable energy is often imagined as a shift away from environmental destruction. Solar panels, wind turbines, and electric vehicles are expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and move societies toward a more sustainable future. Yet hidden beneath this optimistic vision lies a growing demand for something far less visible: metals. Among the many materials powering the energy transition, copper and nickel stand out because of the enormous quantities required for batteries, electrical infrastructure, and low-carbon technologies (Nijnens et al., 2023).

Nickel, in particular, has become increasingly important. Over the past decade, Indonesia has emerged as the world’s dominant producer, increasing its nickel production tenfold and now supplying more than half of global demand (Giljum et al., 2025). Some projections suggest that by 2040, Indonesia could provide nearly three-quarters of global nickel production. While this expansion supports the global push toward decarbonization, it has also accelerated deforestation and environmental pressures across tropical regions.

The challenge is not merely the quantity of mining, but where mining occurs. Many nickel deposits are found in laterite formations lying close to the surface beneath tropical forests—ecosystems that are among the most biodiverse and carbon-rich environments on Earth. Recent studies suggest that the land-use footprint of nickel extraction may be dramatically larger than previously estimated (Heijlen & Duhayon, 2024). For some mines, the ecological footprint can be hundreds of times greater than industry estimates, potentially causing irreversible biodiversity loss and substantial carbon emissions from forest destruction (Mervine et al., 2025).

The consequences extend beyond ecosystems. Although mining can generate employment opportunities and improve local incomes, these benefits are often accompanied by pollution, social conflicts, and declining long-term well-being. Nickel processing itself also remains highly carbon-intensive because refining laterite ores frequently depends on energy-intensive methods powered by coal-fired facilities (Bria et al., 2025).

Recognizing these tensions, a recent global study examined the trade-offs between future nickel supply and conservation priorities. Using a mine-by-mine global scenario model, researchers found that between 2025 and 2050, approximately half of all mined nickel may threaten the top 10% of terrestrial regions considered most critical for biodiversity conservation and carbon storage. Furthermore, more than half of projected nickel production may come from coastal mining areas that overlap with globally important marine conservation zones (Hyman et al., 2026).

The findings also reveal a difficult dilemma surrounding alternatives such as deep-sea mining. Although deep-sea mining could potentially reduce pressure on tropical forests, it remains highly controversial because deep-sea ecosystems are poorly understood and potentially vulnerable to irreversible damage. Ironically, restricting deep-sea mining entirely could increase reliance on nickel extraction from ecologically sensitive terrestrial and coastal environments (Hyman et al., 2026).

Nickel does not possess value solely because it can power batteries or support economic growth. Its value emerges through interconnected relationships that also include forests, biodiversity, climate stability, and human wellbeing. The energy transition, therefore, is not simply a technological replacement of fossil fuels with renewable systems. It is also a transformation in how societies define and prioritize value itself (Khuc & Nguyen, 2026). If decarbonization focuses narrowly on reducing emissions while overlooking ecological and social relationships, humanity risks solving one crisis only to create another (Vuong, 2025; Nguyen & Ho, 2026). A truly sustainable transition may depend not only on mining better, but on learning to see value beyond the metals buried underground.

References

Bria, E. et al. (2025). A holistic framework for examining complex problems in energy transition solutions. One Earth, 8, 101249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101249

Basuhi, R. et al. (2024). Clean energy demand must secure sustainable nickel supply. Joule, 8, 2960–2973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101249

Giljum, S. et al. (2025). Metal mining is a global driver of environmental change. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 6, 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-025-00683-w

Heijlen, W. & Duhayon, C. (2024). An empirical estimate of the land footprint of nickel from laterite mining in Indonesia. The Extractive Industries and Society, 17, 101421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2024.101421

Hyman, J., et al. (2026). Growing nickel supply from the tropics threatens priority conservation areas. Nature Ecology & Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-026-03068-4

Khuc, V. Q. & Nguyen, M. H. (2026). Cultural Additivity Theory. https://books.google.com/books?id=Y4XZEQAAQBAJ

Mervine, E. M. et al. (2025). Biomass carbon emissions from nickel mining have significant implications for climate action. Nature Communications, 16, 481. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-55703-y

Nguyen, M. H., & Ho, M. T. (2026). The absurdist approach to unveiling possible paradoxical thinking for innovative socio-psychological research. MethodsX, 16, 103910. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2026.103910

Nijnens, J., et al. (2023). Energy transition will require substantially less mining than the current fossil system. Joule, 7, 2408–2413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joule.2023.10.005

Vuong, Q. H. (2025). Wild Wise Weird. AISDL. https://books.google.com/books?id=C5dDEQAAQBAJ