Ekskluzivni intervju s glavnom zastupnicom „Rio Tinta“ u Srbiji, Marijantom Babić, za „Novosti“ izazvao je burne reakcije. Kritičari su izrazili zabrinutost zbog potencijalnog uništavanja životne sredine projektom „Jadar“. Naime, Babić je demantovala većinu optužbi, tvrdeći da sumporna kiselina neće biti zagrevana do štetne tačke, da se neće koristiti cijanid, te da će se trošak vode smanjiti. Ipak, kritike i dalje traju, posebno od strane političara koji organizuju proteste protiv kompanije „Rio Tinto“.
Project „Jadar“, which is being developed by „Rio Tinto“ in Serbia, has sparked controversy and received criticism from various media outlets, environmental organizations, and politicians. In an exclusive interview with the main representative of „Rio Tinto“ in Serbia, Marijanta Babić, for „Novosti“, she addressed concerns regarding the potential environmental impact of the project. Babić denied most of the allegations, stating that sulfuric acid will not be heated to a harmful point, cyanide will not be used, and water consumption will be reduced. However, critics continue to voice their concerns, with politicians organizing protests against „Rio Tinto“.
The call to appear on N1 news followed, where Babić answered almost the same questions that were asked by our editorial team, focusing on whether the „Jadar“ project will harm the environment. Despite her explanations, project critics persist in condemning anything related to the mining of jadarite and „Rio Tinto“. Instead of experts tackling the issue in this phase and providing answers about the project’s environmental sustainability, politicians have raised the temperature and criticism to boiling point, organizing protests over the weekend with the sole intention of driving „Rio Tinto“ out of the country. It is interesting to note that such protests did not exist four years ago.
Furthermore, the project has become a political issue, with opposing parties seeing an opportunity for political gain by blocking the project. „Rio Tinto“ remains resolute in its decision to complete the project, despite ongoing political criticism. The government of Serbia has imposed an embargo on the project, which was supposed to commence construction in 2020 and last for four years. Recently, there has been renewed debate over whether the project will be realized. Various theories have emerged, suggesting that political protests may be motivated by countries wishing to hinder the project. Additionally, domestic factors may be concerned about the potential economic benefits of the project for Serbia.
It is disheartening that such an economically significant project, meant to serve future generations, has become a political issue, stated Dubravka Đedović Handanović, Minister of Energy and Mining. She emphasized the importance of ensuring the project’s sustainability and benefits for the country and its citizens, including job creation, higher wages, and positioning Serbia as a key player in critical mineral production. Constructive debates based on facts are essential. We also consulted Dr. Dragana Đorđević, a scientific collaborator at the Institute of Chemistry, Technology, and Metallurgy at the University of Belgrade, to assess the project.
Dr. Đorđević expressed concerns about using concentrated sulfuric acid and the transportation process. Babić refuted these claims, stating that the project’s plans involve using sulfuric acid below its boiling point and implementing safety measures during transportation. She also highlighted the widespread use of sulfuric acid in various industries worldwide and the strict regulations governing its use in Serbia. The debate continues, highlighting the need for factual discussions on the project’s potential environmental impact and benefits for the country.
