Company says lithium project is ‘as green as possible’ but environmental groups not convinced

The Green River is pictured outside of Moab, Utah on May 7, 2018. (Kyle Dunphey/Utah News Dispatch)

An Australian-based mineral company’s plans to produce lithium near Green River in southern Utah are moving forward after the state approved its water rights application earlier this month. 

The proposed project from A1 Lithium, a subsidiary of Anson Resources, requires a lot of water — almost 14,000 acre-feet annually, according to its application, which is more than the entire capacity of Recapture Reservoir in San Juan County. And it would involve drilling through an aquifer contaminated by radiation from an old uranium mill. 

That prompted a coalition of environmental groups to ask the state to reconsider the application last week, arguing the plan could be detrimental to public welfare. It’s the latest critique of the project, which has seen some pushback from nonprofits, a few local and federal agencies like the Bureau of Land Management, National Parks Service and the Bureau of Reclamation, the three of which submitted letters of concern to the Utah Division of Water Rights. 

But the company says its project is as green as mineral extraction gets and intends to recycle most of the water used. In a statement to Utah News Dispatch the company’s CEO said the goal of the project is to provide electric vehicle manufacturers with a domestic source of lithium. 

“The lithium we are extracting will go into electric vehicles, and the whole point of them is to have a lower impact on the environment. We’re operating from the same point of view,” A1 Lithium CEO Bruce Richardson said. 

The company’s Paradox Lithium Project, named after the basin that extends from southeastern Utah into the Four Corners area, has been in the works for several years. During a Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Interim Committee meeting last November, Richardson told lawmakers the project is expected to be in full swing by 2027. 

“We decided to make the project as green as possible,” Richardson said.

The CEO said the project will bring between 300 to 500 jobs to Green River, with an additional 150 added once the company ramps up construction, ranging from highly specialized scientists to forklift operators and truck drivers. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, less than 1,000 people live in Green River. 

“It’s a very good project, it provides a lot of jobs and revitalizes the town of Green River, something very important, and it has a very good ESG contribution,” Richardson said. ESG refers to environmental, social and governance, a line of thinking that takes a company’s environmental impact or social harm into consideration, instead of solely focusing on profit. 

Lithium, used in rechargeable batteries, is an essential component as automobile manufacturers ramp up electric vehicle production. With the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, Americans who purchase electric vehicles are eligible for tax credits, as long as the manufacturers domestically source 40% of the battery’s raw materials domestically. Currently, Richardson said, most of the world’s lithium comes from China. 

“The purpose here of the IRA is to break that supply chain, that’s why this project is advantageous,” he said during the committee meeting. 

The annual 14,000 acre-feet of water A1 Lithium wants to pump from an aquifer near the Green River would be used to essentially wash the lithium of contaminants, Richardson said. 

But to get there, the company needs to first drill through an aquifer poisoned from a Cold War-era uranium mill. On the site adjacent to where A1 plans to drill sits an old uranium tailings cell managed by the U.S. Department of Energy, and environmental groups say that poses a dangerous worst-case scenario. 

“There’s a lot of uncertainty,” said Kyle Roerink, executive director of the Great Basin Water Network. “I’m not anti-lithium. I’m pro public welfare.” 

A groundwater containment plan for the contaminated area has been in place for more than a decade. Per the plan, the Utah Division of Water Rights needs to notify the U.S. Department of Energy when there’s an application to appropriate water near the contaminated area — the division did, and so far the Department of Energy hasn’t commented or protested the application, said Marc Stilson, the southeastern regional engineer for the Utah Division of Water Rights.

“We’re pretty familiar with this area and the different concerns and challenges,” said Stilson. “We knew about the cleanup and contamination of the area and the potential groundwater contamination. We considered all of that.” 

Stilson acknowledged the concerns of drilling through the contaminated aquifer. “But in this particular case, they’re not seeking to appropriate water from those aquifers. They’re going very deep,” he said, pointing to a number of state and federal regulations that dictate how the company is supposed to operate. 

But that explanation doesn’t pass muster for Roerink, who helped spearhead the request for reconsideration submitted last Wednesday. Lithium production is relatively new to the area and Roerink questions whether the current regulatory framework is up to date. 

“Could regulators even fathom that an entity was going to come and apply for wells just a few feet away from where the actual pile of radioactive waste sits? And drill through contaminated aquifers? I don’t think they foresaw this,” he said. 

A1 applied for its water appropriation in July 2023. Per Utah Division of Water Rights guidelines, the application was advertised for two weeks in local media — a 20-day comment period followed, where several concerned parties filed official protests. The division held hearings and requested additional information from the company. 

A1’s application received some pushback from Green River residents, including one woman who in her formal protest letter wrote “it is a huge risk to have the possible contamination of the Green River water system.” 

“If there were to be any ‘mishaps’ having this operation so close to the river would make it impossible to contain a spill. I am also concerned about the dust uranium contamination that is a possibility while working around the old uranium plant and tailings site,” she wrote. 

In response to concerns raised by locals and environmental groups, Richardson told Utah News Dispatch the company is “committed to being environmentally responsible and sustainable.” 

“We realize how precious water is in our arid environment and the importance of being good stewards of it and the environment,” Richardson said. 

Other concerns stem from the sheer amount of water A1 Lithium plans to use. The National Parks Service, Bureau of Land Management and Bureau of Reclamation all submitted letters of concern in the fall, mostly regarding the water appropriation. 

In its letter, the National Parks Service said it was “concerned” that the project “could impair their water rights and negatively impact” resources managed at Canyonlands National Park. 

The application was ultimately approved on May 1 and on May 21, Great Basin Water Network along with the environmental group Living Rivers and a few Green River locals filed a request for reconsideration, which essentially asks the division to deny its approval. 

“We have seen the petition filed,” Richardson said in a statement. “We will continue to work with the Utah Division of Water Rights and other oversight agencies as needed.”

Utah code also allows for groups to challenge the decision directly to an appeals court, which Roerink said is not out of the question. 

“This application is the first of many that will come for these types of appropriations. We’re at an important crossroads here and we don’t have a big margin of error,” he said.  

The post Company says lithium project is ‘as green as possible’ but environmental groups not convinced appeared first on Utah News Dispatch.