Is Purchasing an Electric Car the Best We Can Do?

Tesla’s involvement in supporting the Democratic Republic of Congo’s (DRC) unethical cobalt mining practices

Zevez Zalay 

November 7th, 2025, 9:15 pm ET

Related Topics

Tesla, cobalt, mineral mining, labor practices, international ethics, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Apple, Microsoft, Dell, Google, child labor, supplier auditing, sub-supplying, electric vehicles, lithium batteries

Like many other American families, my family members have started looking into electric car alternatives to help lower their carbon footprint and save on gas mileage. An article published by the SMU Science and Technology Review states: 

As the climate crisis continues to make headlines, more consumers are looking for companies to provide sustainable solutions.4 Because things like solar panels and electric vehicles are more sustainable than their alternatives, the demand for them is increasing, and with it, the demand for cobalt. Global cobalt production is expected to grow 585 % by 2050. (Schleich, 2024)

My uncle ended up purchasing a Rivian this past year, after being put on the waitlist for many different models of electric vehicles. But, for those consumers like my uncle, what are we really being put on a waitlist that will make us greener, or more ethical towards the planet, if we are helping to increase cobalt production?

What is “cobalt”

Many popular brands of electric vehicles include Volkswagen, BMW, Hyundai, Ford, and General Motors. Although by far the car that we see the most on the road is Tesla, which started the craze around electric cars by increasing the accessibility of electric cars by installing charging stations all around the country. Additionally, I remember seeing some of my favorite YouTubers getting Teslas before the COVID-19 pandemic and thinking about how sleek the interiors looked–no wonder people wanted this type of car. However, despite the influence and accessibility of Teslas, and setting aside their newfound political representativeness, is purchasing a Tesla really going to make us more ethical or greener consumers?Once you start digging into the potential negatives of purchasing an electric vehicle, you will quickly stumble upon statements like these:

Almost 80% of the world’s cobalt is mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo and between 15-30% of that amount is produced in informal, or artisanal (ASM), mines. More than 25,000 children work at these informal sites, and there are serious mine safety issues. ASM cobalt is routinely co-mingled with cobalt from mechanized mining, making the two impossible to distinguish. (Posner, 2024)

Cobalt is one of the minerals that is essential for creating electric car batteries, which, for most consumers like my uncle, is the part of an electric vehicle that holds the “green” or “efficient” appeal. While advertising focuses heavily on the bonuses of owning one of these vehicles, it makes it easy to ignore the fact that children were most likely involved in the process of making your vehicle, and you paid extra for that. 

Tesla addresses ethical issues regarding cobalt mining

Tesla addressed the issues surrounding cobalt mining in their 2018 “Conflict Minerals Report”. While I think it is wonderful that they make efforts to go over their supplier list every year and conduct audits on their suppliers to ensure that they are following laws and Tesla’s ethical policies (Tesla, 2018), there are still some odd choices of wording used in the document that make me question the integrity of their statements. First, we have to acknowledge that foreign suppliers are not bound to U.S. laws or any company policy, as they are physically removed from such restrictions. A supplier is able to sign off on documents, asking them to comply with certain rules and continue to operate unethically, as they are not legally bound by these agreements. So, it's wonderful that there are documents outlining what Tesla hopes to hold their suppliers accountable for, but it doesn’t do much when they are contracting a new supplier. On top of this loophole, Tesla gives itself some breathing room on the matter by stating:

Many of our Tier 1 suppliers (i.e., direct suppliers) do not purchase all their raw materials directly from the mining/refining parties and instead obtain them from downstream suppliers and sub-suppliers. Therefore, reliably determining the origin is a difficult task, but the due diligence practices outlined below provide additional information and transparency that help us, and our suppliers, adhere to the responsible sourcing principles of our Supplier Code of Conduct (Tesla, 2018). 

This statement was great at making me want to read further to see how they mitigate the issues caused by sub-supplying, but I should have prepared myself to be disappointed. As they continued to detail their auditing process, they admitted that they use third parties to conduct their audits (Tesla, 2018), which doesn’t ensure the truthfulness of what these parties report regarding the suppliers. Especially in foreign countries where bribery may be legal, or they may be in close relations and want to benefit the suppliers by lying to keep their big Tesla contract. Additionally, they detail that they don’t want to directly or indirectly financially benefit any armed groups that are mining in the Republic of Congo (Tesla, 2018).  However, when you combine that information with the fact that they are relying on third parties, it makes them even less trustworthy when the presence of firearms is put into the mix. Almost anyone would choose to lie about the practices of a supplier to ensure their personal safety, and many people would also feel motivated to use violence to ensure their financial gains. 

Children mining cobalt and trudging up a hill. Image: picture-alliance/dpa

I know those are big assumptions to make about a large electric vehicle company possibly having violence and bribery, and other corruption present in their supply chain when they stated they were not doing so. But my statements do not live in solitude. International Rights Advocates (IRAdvocates) filed against the car brand, stating that they were not adhering to the ethical codes they promised they would ensure (Collingsworth, 2025). For which the following actions were found in their supply chain:

• Bribery

• Money laundering

• Exhausting shifts

• Withholding food and water

• Meager pay

• shooting 

• Torturing

• Killing

• Forced labor

• Physical abuse

• Violent evictions

• Deadly pollution (Collingsworth, 2025)

With this exhaustive list, it's shocking that Tesla hasn’t gotten much public attention for the news or the lawsuit. However, with Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk, being more integrated into the American government than many of us thought he would, there may be certain benefits he and his company are receiving for breaching their conduct and U.S. laws, so as not to focus more public attention on the company and to keep them in better financial standing. Unfortunately, this isn’t just speculation either. In regard to the same court case led by Collingsworth today, “Tuesday's decision upheld a November 2021 dismissal by U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols in Washington.” (Stempel, 2024) While this happened in 2021, this dismissal not only protected Tesla, but it also protected other major tech companies, Apple, Dell, Microsoft, and Google. With Musk’s close relationship today with President Trump, I don’t foresee a change in this 2021 dismissal anytime soon, despite the IRAdvocates and Collingsworth continuing to push forward on justice for these human rights violations in big tech. On top of the human rights violations presented by the IRAdvocates and the dangerous nature of mining to begin with, miners in the DRC face even more dangers:

Further, cobalt is toxic to humans, and the “particles emitted during cobalt mining consist of radioactive emissions, cancer-causing particles, and particles which may cause vision problems, vomiting and nausea, [and] thyroid damage.” Continued exposure can even lead to various lung, respiratory, and skin diseases. (Schleich, 2024)

When you thought it couldn’t get worse, if you are a woman in the mines, you are likely a part of the 73.75% who have reported getting sexually assaulted, and if you are a child, you get paid even less than a dollar a day. Many families will withhold their children from school so that they can work 12 hours a day with them, so that they can survive and have food on the table for one more day (Schleich, 2024).

It’s easy to separate ourselves from international human rights violations, as we frequently hear about similar things in the news; we don’t have the primary experience of witnessing these things occurring, and we don’t know anyone who has a primary experience to hear the emotional weight from. So take a moment with me to imagine. You are a mother in the DRC. You open your eyes to see an unknown man saying something to you. As you start to wake up, you quickly understand that you are being evicted from your home by force. You leave behind much of your stuff and are given the decision to work in the cobalt mines or let your children die of starvation. You want to live another day, you want to see your children grow up, and try to earn a better life than what you were able to give them thus far. You start mining when you wake up in the morning, and you don’t stop until it is hours past dark. Throughout the day, you are covered in mud, your hands are cold, your stomach is eating itself, and you are screamed at and hit by a man who tells you to trudge up the hill faster while he holds a gun at his hips. If you're “lucky,” you get a break from the work so a man can take his stress out by using you. But all this suffering is not enough to put food on the table, and you have to pull your children away from their friends at school and subject them to your same torture so that you can see the sun rise tomorrow.

Luckily, we get to sit in our warm, furnished homes in New York, play video games, and talk to our friends to have escapism from the education we take for granted–and some of us have the luxury of lowering our environmental impact by having a Tesla in the driveway. Since, in Tesla’s own twisted way, we are “helping” that mother in the DRC live another day through our purchase. 

How can Tesla improve?

White Tesla outside of a Tesla dealership. Credit: Brandon Bell / Getty Images / Investopedia

For Tesla, there are many things that I would suggest, or cease immediately, especially when looking at the proposal made by Investor Advocates for Social Justice (Tesla). While Tesla is not the only company unethically sourcing cobalt from the DRC, they have the opportunity to make an example of themselves and to set a standard for how seriously companies should take their ethical policies. According to Schleich, there could be options and benefits to sourcing cobalt domestically:

One mine in Idaho, the Jervois Idaho Cobalt Operations Mine, holds about 88 % of the United States ' cobalt and recently recommenced construction in 2021.71 Once completed, the mine was expected to produce enough cobalt to make up about 10-15 % of the United States ' cobalt consumption, but construction on the mine came to a stop just three months after it began. Cobalt prices dropped too low due to the increased amounts of supply coming out of the DRC, making the Idaho mine unprofitable once it set its own prices to match the DRC's. A domestic U.S. mine is believed to be a solution to many of the problems that miners face in the DRC, as the mine would enforce more stringent mining practices that reduce environmental harm, and its workers would be protected under U.S. labor laws. Domestic mines would also be beneficial to American companies and consumers, as tax credits can be earned when certain minerals used in popular items, such as electric vehicles, are mined domestically. (Schleich, 2024)

While Tesla would be experiencing a higher cost of goods, as a bigger company, it should be viewed as a luxury that you have the financial means to separate yourself from unfathomable human rights violations, rather than an unwanted expense. Furthermore, since many big tech companies source from the DRC, sourcing domestically can set Tesla apart from the market, making it the most ethically viewed choice among consumers, as ethics is a main factor driving consumers to purchase an electric car in the first place. Additionally, I would update their statements and practices made in 2018. Get feedback from their consumer base, and ask “what can we improve?” See what flaws they pick out, why they deem those practices as flaws to your policy, and how that reflects on their likelihood to purchase a Tesla in the future. Finally, I would go back to the basics and have employees look internally at their own virtuous characters, as much of the change needs to happen culturally for Tesla. In addition they can look towards the start of the company, or the start of their involvement of the company and ask themselves the following questions:

• How did the company identify? Do you still align with that identity? If not, what changed?

• What is your current mission statement, and do your actions align with it?

• Were there changes during scaling that increased revenue, and were they ethical?

• How do your shareholders, employees, and customers view your policies on paper versus the outcomes of said policies?

• Are you in a favorable stance with any environmental or human rights organizations? What suggestions do they have for you?

• Do you have an actionable plan to improve company ethics within the next 5 years? Are there any goals in sight?

• What responsibilities do we have towards our shareholders, employees, consumers, the environment, and humans that are in our supply chain?

• How can we exhibit transparency about changes we intend to make?

• Would you want to be the mother in DRC?

Resources

Posner, M. (2024, December 13). The top 10 human rights issues that businesses face in 2025. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelposner/2024/12/13/the-top-10-human-rights-issues-that-businesses-face-in-2025/ Forbes+2Stern Center for Business & Human Rights+2

International Labour Organization. (2017, August 5). ILO aims to eradicate child labour within eight-year deadline. Deutsche Welle. https://www.dw.com/en/ilo-aims-to-eradicate-child-labor-within-eight-year-deadline/a-41385008

Tesla, Inc. (2019). 2018 Conflict Minerals Report. https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/about/legal/2018-conflict-minerals-report.pdf Tesla

Business & Human Rights Resource Centre. (2024, March 6). USA: Tesla sued over alleged forced labour and greenwashing in cobalt supply chain. https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/usa-tesla-sued-over-alleged-forced-labour-and-greenwashing-in-cobalt-supply-chain/

Stempel, J. (2024, March 6). US appeals court dismisses child labour case against tech companies. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-appeals-court-dismisses-child-labor-case-against-tech-companies-2024-03-05/ Reuters+1

Kaitlin Schleich. (2024). Unveiling the Dark Side of Innovation: Sustainability, Cobalt Mining, and Modern-Day Slavery. [PDF file]. Retrieved from https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1373&context=scitech

Tesla, Inc. (2020, July 7). Human Rights Disclosure – 2020 (SEC filing No. 0001214659-20-005791). https://ir.tesla.com/_flysystem/s3/sec/000121465920005791/r619200px14a6g-gen_0.pdf Tesla Investor Relations

Investopedia. (n.d.). Image: Tesla dealership – Getty Images. https://www.investopedia.com/thmb/2A_kOqzofUTtxsoKPz-mQlrb_V0=/1500x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/INV_TeslaDealership_GettyImages-1494887228-d84da0e690bd42fea0ebf3a667fc85bc.jpg