Loading...
BETA – We are refining the platform. Your feedback helps us improve. Share feedback
Loading...
Publish your own articles and insights on Citable ESG
Pro organisations publish unlimited content, strengthening their AI Citability Score and visibility to procurement teams, investors, clients, customers, partners, and followers.

Volkswagen, Ford, and Tesla's EV battery supply chains connect to deforestation of primary rainforest in Sulawesi, Indonesia – home to the Tolaki indigenous people and the world's largest nickel reserves.
An analysis of corporate disclosures and trade data from the past two years traces nickel used in battery cathodes back to mines operating on indigenous woodland. Nickel remains attractive to carmakers because it increases energy density and vehicle range. The finding exposes a structural problem: companies marketing electric vehicles as an environmental solution are materially dependent on supply chains that destroy biodiverse forests.
This is not a minor leak in otherwise sound procurement. It is a gap between marketed sustainability and actual sourcing practice. The three companies named have not disclosed these connections transparently – the analysis had to reconstruct them from corporate records and trade flows. That opacity itself is the problem.
Sulawesi is a wildlife hotspot. Nickel extraction there has already altered landscapes significantly. The Tolaki people's relationship to these forests – cultural, economic, spiritual – receives no mention in standard battery supply chain reporting.
Here's the hard question: can an EV genuinely be called low-carbon if its production drives deforestation? Scope 3 emissions accounting captures indirect carbon impact, but it rarely captures biodiversity loss or indigenous land dispossession. These carmakers may meet their emissions targets while destroying irreplaceable ecosystems and displacing communities. Until supply chains include deforestation risk assessment and indigenous consent as non-negotiable requirements – not voluntary commitments – the EV transition risks becoming a rebranding exercise rather than a systemic fix.