Project
Photo: Ana Rodríguez Carrington (CC BY 2.0)Victory: Biosphere Reserve in Baja California Saved from Toxic Mine
Known as an “ecological treasure house,” the Sierra La Laguna Biosphere Reserve at the southern tip of Baja California will not be spoiled by toxic mine waste, thanks in part to AIDA’s advocacy.
The reserve was once an island, so it’s home to rare plant and animal species. Canyons, swimming holes, and hot springs can be found in its granite mountain range and lowland tropical forests.
Thanks to AIDA and our partners in Mexico, the Mexican government denied an environmental permit for the Paredones Amarillos gold mine, halting the project for the time being. To protect the biosphere reserve, AIDA helped educate community groups and decision makers about the mine's risks. This helped to build the political momentum necessary for the government to deny the permit.
To extract gold from the mountains, the Canadian company Vista Gold proposed to carve out huge quantities of rock—each ton containing a mere gram of gold–-grind it into sludge, and treated it with cyanide. The company planned to dump massive amounts of toxic waste (called “tailings”) behind a dam intended to store it forever. Unfortunately, tailings dams can break for various reasons, as happened at Bolivia’s Porco mine in 1996. When that dam collapsed, more than a quarter million metric tons of tailings flooded the river and contaminated 500 miles (800 km) of waterways in Bolivia, Argentina and Paraguay.
The mine could also cause acid mine drainage. When sulfur-containing rocks are exposed to air and water, sulfuric acid forms, which causes toxic heavy metals to dissolve and drain into the watershed. The risk of acid mine drainage in Sierra La Laguna was significant and the human and environmental cost would have been tremendous: thousands of people and countless wildlife in the reserve rely on its water for survival.
Depleting freshwater is a further threat because mines use tremendous quantities of water. Owing to the scarcity of water in the reserve, Vista Gold proposed to build a plant on the Pacific coast to remove salt from sea water in a highly energy-intensive process, and then pump the water 45 km to the mine site. The desalination plant posed a threat to the endangered leatherback sea turtle.
Singly and together, the mine’s impacts would have devastated a rare jewel, a unique and lush paradise worth saving for future generations.
Related projects
Neither AngloGold Ashanti nor Mineros S.A.: Cajamarca is a municipality free of large-scale mining
Even if the companies change, the decision of Cajamarca's citizens remains the same: to defend their territory against large-scale mining. Bogotá / Cajamarca. Following the announcement by Mineros S.A. that it has signed an agreement to acquire 100% of the shares of AngloGold Ashanti Colombia S.A.S. in the La Colosa mining project in Cajamarca, the Legal Coalition for the Defense of Cajamarca (1) reiterates a clear message: Cajamarca has already decided, and its territory must remain free of large-scale mining. For more than a decade, we have been engaged in mobilization, legal defense, and advocacy efforts to protect Cajamarca from the La Colosa mining project promoted by AngloGold Ashanti. Thanks to this collective defense of the territory and environmental regulations, exploration activities for this project are currently suspended. Since 2017, the citizens of Cajamarca have spoken out emphatically through a public consultation, in which 98% of voters rejected mining activities in the municipality. This result has full legal effect, as confirmed by two Colombian judges, and represented a milestone in participation and environmental democracy in Colombia, as well as a clear expression of the territory's desire to protect water, the municipality's agricultural vocation, and the region's strategic ecosystems. In this context, the change of ownership of the project from AngloGold Ashanti to Mineros S.A. does not change the reality of the territory or the position of the communities. Although the companies may change, Cajamarca's decision remains the same: to defend its territory against large-scale mining. Furthermore, neither of these two companies has the necessary environmental permits to reactivate the La Colosa project, yet they insist on disregarding the community's autonomous and legitimate decisions. The announcement of this transaction comes just days after the Cajamarca City Council approved a municipal agreement initiated by citizens that declared 33 properties belonging to AngloGold Ashanti as areas of public utility and social interest. This decision reaffirms the municipality's institutional commitment to protecting the territory. The organizations that have signed this statement reiterate that Cajamarca is not and will not be a mining territory. Whether it be AngloGold, Mineros S.A., or any other company, large-scale mining has no place in the municipality. We will continue to take all necessary social, legal, and political actions to defend the territory and ensure that Cajamarca's decision is respected. #LaConsultaSeRespeta (1) The Coalition is made up of the Cajamarca Youth Socio-Environmental Collective (COSAJUCA), the SIEMBRA Socio-Legal Center, the Mining Studies Research Group at the University of Antioquia, the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Public Action Group Legal Clinic (GAP) of the Faculty of Jurisprudence of the University of Rosario, the Legal Clinic on Law and Territory of the Javeriana University, the Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ), and Sibelys Mejía Rodríguez (independent researcher).Press contactsRobinson Mejía | COSAJUCA | [email protected] | 300 218 36 41 Sara Sofia Moreno | SIEMBRA | [email protected] | 300 568 33 33 | Lorena Zárate | AIDA | [email protected] | +52 553902 7481Laura Becerra | CCJ | [email protected] | 313 475 5815
Read more
Organizations and communities call on the IACHR to take action against human rights violations caused by fossil fuel projects
At a public hearing, they highlighted the impacts and risks to Latin American communities resulting from decades of extraction, commercialization, and use of coal, oil, and gas, as well as from irresponsible closure and exit of projects in the context of the energy transition.Guatemala City. Representatives of organizations and communities in Latin America called on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) to address human rights violations resulting from the operation and closure of fossil fuel projects (coal, gas, and oil) in the region.They did so at a public hearing in which—based on emblematic cases in Colombia, Chile, Ecuador, and the Dominican Republic—they presented evidence to the Commission of human rights violations and risks of violations resulting from decades of extraction, commercialization, and use of fossil fuels without complying with socio-environmental standards. They also warned of violations already occurring in the irresponsible closure and exit from projects within the framework of energy transition policies.The cases presented included the Carbones de Cerrejón project in La Guajira, northern Colombia, which is the largest open-pit coal mine in Latin America; the Punta Catalina Thermoelectric Power Plant, located in the southern region of the Dominican Republic and fueled by Colombian coal; the Quintero and Puchuncaví Thermoelectric Complex, located in a bay in Chile recognized as an environmental sacrifice zone and where 14 polluting industries converge; the Norgener thermoelectric power plant in Tocopilla, Chile, whose closure process included the forced and accelerated burning of 94,000 tons of coal that were in storage; and oil exploitation in the Amazon, including that installed in the Yasuní National Park in Ecuador, declared a Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO.The hearing—held during the 195th Session of the IACHR—was granted to the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Waorani Nationality (Ecuador), the La Guajira le Habla al País Platform (Colombia) (1), communities of Tocopilla and the association Mujeres de Zona de Sacrificio Quintero-Puchuncaví en Resistencia (Chile), and the National Committee to Combat Climate Change (Dominican Republic).During the session, organizations and communities also presented information demonstrating that Latin America lacks regulatory frameworks to ensure the closure and exit of fossil fuel projects with a human rights approach. In this context, and based on the cases described and the trends identified, they requested that the Commission:Establish standards to guide States in fulfilling their obligations to respect and guarantee human rights throughout the entire project life cycle, ensuring early identification of impacts, prevention of harm, definition of responsibilities, and reparation for damages.Define standards and criteria to guide States in adopting preventive, corrective, and impact mitigation measures in relation to human rights, including comprehensive closure plans, the safe dismantling of infrastructure, environmental remediation, and the monitoring of risks to health and ecosystems.Promote regulatory frameworks that require companies to plan for project closure, including establishing responsibilities for environmental and social liabilities, financial guarantees for closure, and mechanisms to prevent the abandonment of operations or the transfer of assets without fulfilling closure obligations.Incorporate differentiated approaches that address the disproportionate impacts on indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant communities, rural communities, and other groups in vulnerable situations.Strengthen guarantees of access to information, effective participation, and access to environmental justice throughout the project cycle, ensuring that affected communities participate in an informed manner in the design, implementation, and oversight of closure and transition processes.Guide States in the creation of oversight, monitoring, and accountability mechanisms to monitor operational, closure, and post-closure processes; define corporate and State responsibilities; and prevent asset transfers or other corporate restructuring as a means of evading responsibilities.Urge States to anticipate and manage the social, economic, cultural, and environmental risks of the gradual replacement of fossil fuels, including measures to address the economic dependence of territories, protect communities' livelihoods, and avoid the impacts of abrupt or poorly managed closure processes.Organizations and communities argued before the IACHR that there is a growing regional risk that the closure and exit processes of fossil fuel projects will be carried out irresponsibly. In several cases, companies abandon operations, cede or transfer assets, return concessions, and cease operations without ensuring the proper management of the socio-environmental impacts generated over many years. These practices can leave impacts unaddressed or unrepaired, while blurring the responsibilities of public and private actors, thereby deepening the risks to human rights and territories.They emphasized that Amazonian states must adopt regional cooperation measures and guarantee the comprehensive protection of the Amazon—one of the most important ecosystems on the planet due to its biodiversity and role in climate regulation—in the face of the closure and exit of hydrocarbon extraction projects. (1) The platform is made up of Wayuu indigenous communities and Afro-descendants from La Guajira, the Center for Research and Popular Education Program for Peace (Cinep/PPP), Censat Agua Viva, and the José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers' Collective (CAJAR).Press contactLorena Zárate | AIDA | [email protected] | +52 553902 7481
Read more
Coal, a dirty and obsolete fuel
Historically, coal has been identified as an important source of non-renewable energy. It was the fuel that powered the Industrial Revolution, transforming the world's production methods, and for a long time, it was the main fuel for transportation, electricity generation, and heating.But it is time to leave that era behind. Today, we know that coal is the fossil fuel that generates the highest carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, one of the main greenhouse gases driving global warming, with effects such as melting glaciers and rising sea levels.In addition to climate and environmental arguments, there are economic, political, and human rights reasons to end the extraction and burning of this fuel.To better understand why coal is so polluting and what its impacts are on the environment and health, we have taken a closer look. Getting to know coalCoal is a rock formed from plant remains that were buried in layers of sediment and did not decompose due to the absence of oxygen.Over millions of years, through geological processes, this organic matter was exposed to high temperatures and pressures. The result was a material composed mainly of carbon.The energy in coal is released during combustion. When burned, coal generates heat. In thermoelectric plants, this heat is used to generate steam and produce electricity.When coal is burned to produce heat or electricity, it releases large amounts of carbon dioxide and, in smaller amounts, methane and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.All these gases harm the environment and human health. Why is it so polluting?Coal has an impact from the moment it is extracted, as open-pit coal mining involves excavating and removing large amounts of earth to reach the coal-rich layers.This means destroying landscapes, razing vegetation and animals, and even causing the forced displacement of populations.Coal mining also pollutes water and soil at extraction sites, both through mining the mineral and through the waste it generates.But the chain of impacts does not end there. During coal combustion, large amounts of CO2 are generated, the main gas responsible for global warming.At the same time, other gases are released during its extraction, handling, and combustion:Methane, which has a global warming potential up to 30 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period.Nitrous oxide, whose global warming potential over a 100-year period is up to 273, and whose lifetime in the atmosphere extends up to 109 years. In addition to greenhouse gases, coal combustion also releases other pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and black carbon (soot), which affect air quality and have indirect effects on the climate, including altering precipitation patterns and contributing to acid rain. What damage does it cause to health?Despite the known environmental and health impacts of coal, for many economies it remains a reliable and cheap energy source.Following the decline in coal consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic, global demand for coal has grown by more than 1.2 billion tons since 2020, according to the International Energy Agency's Coal 2024 analysis.Despite increased electricity generation from renewable sources, major consumers such as China and India continue to rely on coal.In Latin America, the future of coal is uncertain. On the one hand, the region continues to extract coal for export or for burning to generate energy. The most emblematic case is Colombia, the world's fifth-largest coal exporter.On the other hand, there are efforts towards decarbonization, such as in Chile, where coal-fired power generation has caused serious health and environmental impacts in so-called “sacrifice zones.”The government proposed a plan to have the entire National Electric System generate 100% clean energy by 2050. However, the recent accelerated burning of surplus coal at a thermoelectric plant, as part of its closure process, has put the spotlight on how this decarbonization is being carried out.As a coal-producing and consuming region, Latin America has a share of responsibility in global efforts to curb coal mining and burning and instead promote energy systems based on non-conventional renewable sources that are sustainable over time and respectful of the environment and people.Ending the coal era is possible. It is time to do so.
Read more