Congo’s Hidden Uranium Exports – Responses from relevant companies

A recent investigation by Lighthouse Reports has uncovered evidence suggesting that the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) may be exporting uranium-laden cobalt without proper safeguards, raising concerns over potential nuclear proliferation risks. This revelation has prompted responses from key stakeholders, including the Chinese government, international regulatory bodies, and major mining firms involved in the region's cobalt supply chain. According to statements released by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, officials expressed unfamiliarity with the alleged situation involving uranium exports from the DRC. They emphasized that Chinese companies operating abroad must adhere strictly to local laws and regulations while implementing necessary environmental protections and fulfilling social responsibilities. The ministry directed inquiries about internal matters back to the relevant Chinese authorities, noting that the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology had not responded to requests for additional information. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) offered its perspective through an expert who stated that the DRC appears to be complying with its safeguarding obligations concerning uranium-bearing cobalt exports. The expert explained that typically, cobalt is exported primarily for its mineral value rather than for uranium content, which often ends up in mining waste known as tailings. This clarification suggests that while uranium might be present in the cobalt being mined, it is generally not the primary focus of export efforts. In response to these allegations, CMOC, one of the leading producers of cobalt hydroxide in the DRC, asserted that all its current production meets both local regulations and international procurement standards regarding uranium content. The company highlighted that none of its products have exceeded permissible uranium levels, and there have been no incidents of customs detentions, customer rejections, or quality disputes linked to uranium content. CMOC detailed its comprehensive quality control systems, which include radiation testing throughout the production chain, ensuring consistent product reliability and maintaining thorough documentation of all tests conducted. The company also addressed concerns about historical data indicating high uranium levels in wet cobalt, stating that it could not verify the accuracy of this information. It clarified that all commercial cobalt hydroxide sold by CMOC is in dry form, emphasizing that the uranium content in both raw materials and final products is below established thresholds. Consequently, specialized uranium removal processes are deemed unnecessary. However, CMOC noted that further reductions in uranium content could be achieved by fine-tuning parameters during the cobalt precipitation process, such as adjusting pH levels and using higher-grade reactive magnesium oxide. Furthermore, CMOC reiterated that neither itself nor any of its subsidiaries engage in uranium separation or extraction activities in either the DRC or China. The company challenged the use of a 75 parts per million (ppm) uranium limit as a universal standard, pointing out that other industry benchmarks exist, including 81 ppm and 100 ppm. It argued that assessments of compliance should consider varying national customs requirements and enterprise-specific standards rather than relying solely on a fixed benchmark. Umicore, another prominent player in the cobalt market, acknowledged that uranium can naturally accompany cobalt in certain geological contexts, resulting in trace amounts within the material. While Umicore did not elaborate further on its stance regarding the uranium content in its products, its acknowledgment underscores the complexity of managing uranium presence in cobalt exports. As investigations continue, the responses from these entities will likely play a crucial role in shaping future policies and practices around uranium management in the cobalt trade.