MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409473021 · doi:10.1186/s13705-025-00521-3

Not in my backyard? Prospects, problems and perceptions of lithium extraction in Austria

2025· article· en· W4409473021 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Sustainability and Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicExtraction and Separation Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaHøgskolen i Innlandet
KeywordsLithium (medication)Extraction (chemistry)PerceptionEconomicsSustainable developmentNatural resource economicsPolitical sciencePsychologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The European Green Deal has rekindled interest in the mining of critical raw materials within Europe’s borders. The Weinebene lithium deposit, near Wolfsberg (Austria), deemed uneconomic as late as the 2000s, has attracted interest from developers because of the widespread demand for the metal for battery technology and in the electro-mobility sector. Based on a multi-scalar analysis, the main objective of this study is to investigate local citizens’ and politicians’ perceptions of potential environmental and socio-economic impacts of the Wolfsberg project. We deploy an interdisciplinary political geology approach that assesses its geological feasibility, social acceptability and the associated power relations, in the light of European debates around so-called ‘green extractivism’. Results The exploitation of the lithium deposit seems to be promising from a geological point of view: the Weinebene hard rock, vein-type spodumene deposit was assessed at 12.9 Mt grading 1% Li 2 O, and the planned mine could provide 10,500 tpa LiOH/year for a period of 20 years, which would be around 4.5% of global production in 2021. However, the main results of the study show that conflicts are emerging around local environmental impacts, for example, the increase of traffic. Such environmental impacts resulting in greater CO 2 emissions contradict decarbonisation objectives and ecological transitions. Local youth and politicians have highlighted the possibility of local mineral production, job creation and economic development. Nevertheless, politicians have criticized the company’s communication policy. Conclusions The geological analysis suggests adequate lithium resources. Otherwise, the Wolfsberg project is undermined by the lack of an open public dialogue on its future. Local residents and politicians are barely involved in the planning and permitting stages. The company European Lithium is confident of starting extraction soon, but in reality this is still uncertain. More widely, our results point towards the need for a strong degrowth strategy to generally reduce mineral consumption in Europe while also stopping destructive mining projects in the Global South. Local public perceptions have to be taken more into account when it comes to the future of lithium extraction in Europe’s ‘backyard’. Mechanisms need to be developed to fully integrate local residents into decision making processes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it