"Mining with meaning - Protecting human rights and the environment in the shift to clean energy", 29 October 2020.

...the extraction and supply of the minerals needed for the transition to a low-carbon world can have a damaging impact on the environment and on human rights...In the wake of the coronavirus crisis, which has amplified calls for a world more respectful of the environment, two months before the entry into force of the European Conflict Minerals Regulation, and three years after the adoption of France's “Duty of Vigilance” law, Sherpa has undertaken to understand how French companies involved in the energy transition identify and prevent human rights and environmental abuses in their value chains of minerals used for the development of clean energy sources.

...We...focused our analysis on whether companies comply with the obligation to set out vigilance measures, examining only the content of the vigilance plans published by the companies in fulfilment of this obligation by which they are bound. The report examines the vigilance plans disclosed by these companies, and therefore only considers what the companies have chosen to integrate into their vigilance measures within the meaning of the law. As such, it is not based on discussions held with the companies. Finally, this analysis applies solely to the content of vigilance plans; it does not consider the implementation of vigilance plans, nor include any observations in the field to assess their implementation.

Furthermore, our analysis of the measures implemented does not aim to discourage companies from making the transition from fossil fuels to a 100% renewable source of energy...

For the vigilance plan and its implementation to be effective and consistent with the obligations of the Duty of Vigilance law, companies are required to clearly map the risks specific to their activities in their vigilance plan. Based on these risks that have been identified with sincerity, companies must clearly present the measures taken to address these risks....However, the vigilance plans reviewed only included the company’s overall vigilance methodology. The measures presented in the plans are not always clear and seem to be based on pre-existing tools, whereas the law calls for new behaviors to establish and implement precise and suitable measures...

1 — SOME COMPANIES CONFUSE VIGILANCE WITH REPORTING

...

2 — THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE USE OF MINERALS ARE OFTEN IGNORED

Some of the companies reviewed use certain minerals for their activities linked to the energy transition. Yet most of them make no mention of the risks and serious human rights and environmental abuses resulting from the extraction and use of these minerals...

This is even more surprising given that some of these companies have already been accused of human rights and environmental abuses. The company Eramet for example...One of its subsidiaries, Comilog, was faced with allegations and taken to court for violations that supposedly took place at its manganese mining site in Moanda in south-east Gabon. The company was accused of dumping the water used for purifying manganese minerals into the surrounding environment, and is believed to have wrongfully terminated the contracts of 600 employees...

Most of the risk maps reviewed therefore have an insufficient level of detail and do not clearly present the risks associated with using certain minerals...

3 — VIGILANCE MEASURES ARE VAGUE AND UNRELATED TO THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH USING MINERALS

...

5 — VERY LIMITED TRACEABILITY OF MINERALS USED

...the majority of the vigilance plans reviewed neither disclose nor provide any information on their suppliers. Most of the companies simply indicate that measures have been taken with respect to their “direct suppliers”. Some companies state that they have taken measures reaching as far as their tier 3 suppliers, but without mentioning them or specifying what those measures are...