Nigeria lithium processing and mining projects raise environmental risk concerns

Nigeria’s emerging lithium industry is positioned as an economic diversification opportunity as global demand grows for electric vehicles (EVs) and renewable energy storage. Lithium is described as “white gold” and is presented as a key input for the energy transition. For a country reliant on oil and gas, the sector is also linked to job creation and foreign investment.

Processing facilities and exploration in Nasarawa and Kaduna

Several companies are moving into Nigeria’s lithium market through processing and project development. Avatar and Ganfeng Limited are establishing lithium processing facilities in Nasarawa State. In Kaduna State, Jupiter Lithium Limited and ReElement Technologies have formed a joint venture aimed at targeting lithium deposits.

These investments are cited as indicators of Nigeria’s growing appeal as a source of lithium. The projects involve both downstream processing activity and upstream deposit targeting. The next operational phase depends on how mining and processing activities are managed on the ground.

Environmental risks from hard-rock mining and waste streams

Lithium extraction is associated with environmental risks, even where deposits are mined using hard-rock methods. Nigeria’s lithium deposits are described as primarily hard rock, which uses less water than brine extraction. The process still generates waste rock, chemical by-products, and air pollutants.

Without stringent regulations, the by-products could contribute to water contamination, land degradation, and public health harms. The source material also notes that in regions where brine extraction is used, water depletion and the release of toxic metals can occur. While Nigeria’s hard-rock approach is not described as facing the same water depletion risk, land impacts and air pollution remain concerns.

Past mining failures highlight governance challenges

Nigeria’s record in managing natural resources has been linked to environmental and social problems. A lead poisoning disaster in Zamfara State in 2010 is cited as an example tied to poorly regulated mining. The incident followed illegal gold mining activities that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of children.

The same governance concerns are raised in relation to lithium operations. Illegal mining activities are described as having expanded, particularly in rural areas, causing environmental damage in multiple locations. In Kwara State, unlicensed mining is described as damaging farmlands and polluting waterways.

Monitoring requirements for lithium projects and local impacts

The source material says projects including Avatar and Ganfeng’s work in Nasarawa and the Jupiter Critical Minerals Project in Kaduna require close monitoring. It states that the Nigerian government has introduced measures intended to promote local processing and protect mineral assets. However, it also says enforcement performance remains weak.

In Kwara, the community of Bani is described as being affected by illegal lithium mining. Farmers have reportedly lost their livelihoods, and children have reportedly left school to work in mining activities. Despite government efforts to crack down on illegal operations, enforcement is described as inadequate in remote areas.

Environmental standards, ESG implementation, and pollution controls

To capitalize on lithium potential while limiting harm, the source material calls for adherence to international standards for mining operations. It highlights collaboration with mining companies to implement Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) frameworks. The measures referenced include waste management, limits on air pollution, limits on water pollution, and safeguarding community health.

The material frames these requirements around the need for regulation and oversight during both extraction and processing phases. It also links potential benefits from lithium—revenue generation and economic diversification—to the requirement that mining be regulated effectively. It warns that repeating past failures involving regulation gaps could lead to severe consequences for communities.

Scroll to Top