2025-11-052025/26:NU7 · p.2NUBusiness & energy
Secondary uranium extraction
Secondary extraction of uranium as a mining byproduct
What's at stake: At stake is whether uranium recovered as a byproduct of other mineral mining, such as rare-earth extraction, can be put to use rather than treated as waste - which affects the economics of certain mining projects and the supply of critical raw materials - while opponents of any uranium extraction warn of added environmental and health risks regardless of the source.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether parliament should reject motions calling for a narrower legislative change permitting secondary/byproduct extraction of uranium from existing mining activity without lifting the general ban, since the government's broader bill already covers it, or whether such a narrower step should instead be pursued on its own, as the reservation demands.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee, having already backed the government's broader bill removing the general ban, considers that motions asking narrowly to permit only byproduct or secondary uranium extraction under current legislation are superseded and rejects them, while noting the EU's ambition to increase secondary extraction of critical raw materials and that large-scale mining needs to be sizeable to be profitable.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 2 (S, V, C)
The reservation (S, V, C), while otherwise favouring rejection of the broader bill, argues that regardless, given the needs of reindustrialisation and the green transition, the government should return with a proposal enabling recovery of metals and secondary extraction of uranium as a byproduct of other mineral extraction - for example from leachate, tailings ponds and waste-rock piles at existing mines - without fully lifting the general ban on uranium extraction. The reasoning is that it would otherwise be wasteful not to make use of uranium already brought up incidentally during other extraction, which could improve the economics of certain mining projects and strengthen the supply of critical raw materials.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 2 by S, V, C.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | Yes | No 0/19/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| S | No | No 0/91/0/15 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| MP | Yes | Abstain 2/0/13/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | explicit |
| C | No | No 0/19/0/5 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| L | No | Yes 14/0/0/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| KD | No | Yes 16/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| M | Yes | Yes 58/0/0/10 | follows the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| SD | No | Yes 61/0/0/11 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
Broke with the party line
| MPAnnika Hirvonen (MP, Stockholms län) | Yes — party line: Abstain |
| MPLeila Ali Elmi (MP, Göteborgs kommun) | Yes — party line: Abstain |
MPs whose vote differs from their party's majority position in this division. Marked with a dark ring in the chamber view.
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2025/26:216 by Fredrik Olovsson et al. (S) proposition 3 and 2025/26:272 by Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C) proposition 2.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2025/26:216 av Fredrik Olovsson m.fl. (S) yrkande 3 och 2025/26:272 av Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C) yrkande 2.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag approved the government's proposal on uranium mining in Sweden. The decision means that uranium mining will be permitted in Sweden and that uranium is classified as a concession mineral, meaning a mineral that is particularly important for society. The decision also means that activities that handle small amounts of uranium will not be subject to licensing requirements and will not be covered by municipal veto. Municipal veto means that municipalities through a local political decision can determine whether the activity should be permitted or not in the municipality. The legislative changes enter into force on 1 January 2026.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants to maintain the current ban on uranium extraction. (S, V, C) — Reservation 2
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan rejects nuclear power expansion as a way out of fossil fuel dependence, which removes the reason for opening up to uranium extraction even when it occurs as a by-product.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan rejects nuclear power expansion as a way out of fossil fuel dependence, which removes the reason for opening up to uranium extraction even when it occurs as a by-product. Mining should, according to the plan, be conducted with a long-term holistic perspective that weighs local natural values, and environmental goals should be followed up with strict legislation. The resource efficiency argument therefore does not weigh more than the plan's opposition to uranium, but the conclusion is derived and uncertain.
Original (Swedish)
Planen avvisar kärnkraftsutbyggnaden som väg ut ur fossilberoendet, vilket tar bort skälet att öppna för uranutvinning även när den sker som biprodukt. Gruvbrytning ska enligt planen drivas med ett långsiktigt helhetsperspektiv som väger in lokala naturvärden, och miljömålen ska följas upp med skarp lagstiftning. Resurseffektivitetsargumentet väger därför inte tyngre än planens motstånd mot uran, men slutsatsen är härledd och osäker.
- no to nuclear power expansiondecisive»Vänsterpartiet avvisar planerna på att bygga ut kärnkraften som en väg ut ur fossilberoendet.« (party programme ↗)“The Left Party rejects plans to expand nuclear power as a way out of fossil fuel dependence.”
- holistic view in mining»Den behöver drivas med ett långsiktigt helhetsperspektiv som ser till såväl de globala behoven som lokala naturvärden och den ekonomiska utvecklingen i närområdet.« (party programme ↗)“It needs to be conducted with a long-term holistic perspective that considers both global needs and local natural values and economic development in the surrounding area.”
- ambitious environmental goals»Vi vill se ambitiösa miljömål som följs upp med skarp lagstiftning och praktiskt arbete.« (party programme ↗)“We want to see ambitious environmental goals followed up with strict legislation and practical work.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan requires conversion to a circular economy for better use of existing resources and sustainable extraction of natural resources.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires conversion to a circular economy for better use of existing resources and sustainable extraction of natural resources. To utilize uranium that is already extracted as a byproduct from existing mine waste is exactly such more efficient resource use, without the general ban being torn up. The plan furthermore wants natural resources to be recycled in a sustainable way so that important nature and cultural values are protected. The counter-proposal is supported.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver omställning till cirkulär ekonomi för bättre användning av befintliga resurser och hållbar utvinning av naturresurser. Att ta till vara uran som redan bryts upp som biprodukt ur befintligt gruvavfall är just ett sådant effektivare resursutnyttjande, utan att det generella förbudet rivs upp. Planen vill också att naturresurser återbrukas på ett hållbart vis så att natur- och kulturvärden skyddas. Motförslaget stöds.
- circular resource usedecisive»Omställning till cirkulär ekonomi, för bättre användning av befintliga resurser.« (party programme ↗)“Conversion to circular economy, for better use of existing resources.”
- sustainable natural resource extraction»Hållbar utvinning och användning av naturresurser, med ekonomisk kompensation till« (party programme ↗)“Sustainable extraction and use of natural resources, with economic compensation to”
- recycling with protected values»utvinnas och återbrukas på ett hållbart vis så att viktiga natur- och kulturvärden skyddas.« (party programme ↗)“extracted and recycled in a sustainable way so that important nature and cultural values are protected.”
- protection of natural values»Värn av biologisk mångfald och Sveriges värdefulla natur och vattenmiljöer.« (party programme ↗)“Protection of biological diversity and Sweden's valuable nature and water environments.”
The plan is categorical: uranium mining should be prohibited and mining of uranium is described as environmentally destructive and waste-generating.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan is categorical: uranium mining should be prohibited and mining of uranium is described as environmentally destructive and waste-generating. The counter-proposal wants to open for secondary extraction of uranium from leachate, sand deposits and waste rock storage, which is uranium extraction even though the general prohibition is formally maintained. The plan's commitment to circular resource use speaks in the other direction but carries less weight than the explicit uranium prohibition.
Original (Swedish)
Planen är kategorisk: uranbrytning ska vara förbjuden och brytning av uran beskrivs som miljöförstörande och avfallsgenererande. Motförslaget vill öppna för sekundär utvinning av uran ur lakvatten, sandmagasin och gråbergsupplag, vilket är utvinning av uran även om det generella förbudet formellt behålls. Planens åtagande om cirkulär resursanvändning talar åt andra hållet men väger lättare än det uttryckliga uranförbudet.
- prohibited uranium miningdecisive»inga nya tillstånd för torvbrytning ska ges och uranbrytning ska vara« (party programme ↗)“no new permits for peat extraction should be granted and uranium mining should be”
- uranium mining creates dangerous waste»miljöförstörande brytning av uran, som är en ändlig resurs som skapar farligt avfall utan« (party programme ↗)“environmentally destructive mining of uranium, which is a finite resource that creates dangerous waste without”
- circular resource use»återanvänds, återbrukas och återvinns.« (party programme ↗)“reused, reprocessed and recycled.”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
The plan wants to make Sweden the world's most resource-efficient country with a more circular economy where minerals and metals are recovered, and rather extract critical raw materials here than import them.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants to make Sweden the world's most resource-efficient country with a more circular economy where minerals and metals are recovered, and rather extract critical raw materials here than import them. Recovering uranium already taken up as a byproduct from leachate, sand deposits and waste rock stacks is precisely the resource management the plan seeks. That the general extraction ban is simultaneously maintained makes the proposal compatible with the plan's nuclear-free vision.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill göra Sverige till världens mest resurseffektiva land med en mer cirkulär ekonomi där mineral och metaller återvinns, och hellre utvinna kritiska råvaror här än importera dem. Att ta tillvara uran som redan tas upp som biprodukt ur lakvatten, sandmagasin och gråbergsupplag är precis den resurshushållning planen efterfrågar. Att det generella utvinningsförbudet samtidigt behålls gör förslaget förenligt med planens kärnkraftsfria vision.
- circular economy and recyclingdecisive»Sverige ska bli världens mest resurseffektiva land och ekonomin mer cirkulär. Med rätt stöd och regelförenklingar kan vi återvinna och återbruka allt från kläder till mineral och metaller.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Sweden shall become the world's most resource-efficient country and the economy more circular. With the right support and regulatory simplification we can recycle and reuse everything from clothes to minerals and metals.”
- domestic supply of critical raw materials»Det är bättre att Sverige tar ansvar och utvinner mer mineral och metaller istället för att fortsätta importera dem från länder med större klimatavtryck och sämre arbetsvillkor.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It is better for Sweden to take responsibility and extract more minerals and metals instead of continuing to import them from countries with greater climate footprint and worse working conditions.”
- stewardship of resources»Vi har en skyldighet att bruka utan att förbruka« (party programme ↗)“We have a duty to use without consuming”
- vision without nuclear power»där Centerpartiets vision är ett samhälle utan kärnkraft« (party programme ↗)“where the Centre Party's vision is a society without nuclear power”
The plan has as its goal that basic raw materials such as minerals shall circulate in the production system and that waste's environmental impact is reduced through reuse.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan has as its goal that basic raw materials such as minerals shall circulate in the production system and that waste's environmental impact is reduced through reuse. Being able to make use of uranium that is already being mined as a by-product or from extraction waste directly responds to that resource management goal, and nuclear power is needed according to the plan for the sake of the climate. The counter-proposal's narrower amendment is therefore in line with the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen har som mål att grundläggande råvaror som mineraler ska cirkulera i produktionssystemet och att avfallets miljöpåverkan minskas genom återanvändning. Att kunna ta till vara uran som redan bryts upp som biprodukt eller ur utvinningsavfall svarar direkt mot det resurshushållningsmålet, och kärnkraften behövs enligt planen för klimatets skull. Motförslagets snävare lagändring ligger därmed i linje med planen.
- circular mineral usedecisive»grundläggande råvaror, såsom växtnäring och mineraler, ska cirkulera i produktionssystemet och« (party programme ↗)“basic raw materials, such as nutrients and minerals, shall circulate in the production system and”
- reuse of waste»Avfallets miljöpåverkan ska minskas genom fungerande återanvändning och återbruk.« (party programme ↗)“Waste's environmental impact shall be reduced through functioning reuse and recycling.”
- nuclear power for the climate»Kärnkraften behövs för klimatets skull och för att minska världens utsläpp.« (party programme ↗)“Nuclear power is needed for the sake of the climate and to reduce the world's emissions.”
- clear environmental and safety requirements»För alla energislag ska finnas tydliga miljö- och säkerhetskrav.« (party programme ↗)“For all energy sources there shall be clear environmental and safety requirements.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
Stewardship according to the plan means not passive preservation but responsible use and enhancement of assets, and waste management shall be based on reuse and material recycling.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
Stewardship according to the plan means not passive preservation but responsible use and enhancement of assets, and waste management shall be based on reuse and material recycling. Making use of uranium that is already extracted as a byproduct or from mining waste is precisely such resource efficiency. The election manifesto's investment in nuclear power strengthens the reasons for not letting the material go to waste.
Original (Swedish)
Förvaltarskapet innebär enligt planen inget passivt bevarande utan ett ansvarsfullt brukande och förädlande av tillgångarna, och avfallshanteringen ska bygga på återanvändning och materialåtervinning. Att ta till vara uran som redan bryts upp som biprodukt eller ur utvinningsavfall är just ett sådant resurshushållande. Valmanifestets satsning på kärnkraft stärker skälen för att inte låta materialet gå till spillo.
- responsible use of resourcesdecisive»Förvaltarskapsprincipen innebär inget passivt bevarande, utan ett ansvarsfullt brukande och förädlande av tillgångarna.« (party programme ↗)“The stewardship principle means not passive preservation but responsible use and enhancement of assets.”
- recycling before landfill»Avfallshantering ska främst utgå från att förebygga avfall, sedan följer återanvändning och materialåtervinning.« (party programme ↗)“Waste management shall primarily be based on preventing waste, then follows reuse and material recycling.”
- investment in nuclear power»Satsa på kärnkraften med långsiktiga villkor att utvecklas. Förläng befintliga reaktorers drift och bygg ut med nya reaktorer.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Invest in nuclear power with long-term conditions for development. Extend the operation of existing reactors and build new ones.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan wishes that Sweden's mineral resources can be extracted responsibly and that bans preventing nuclear power expansion are repealed.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wishes that Sweden's mineral resources can be extracted responsibly and that bans preventing nuclear power expansion are repealed. The counter-proposal does wish to enable secondary extraction, but explicitly wishes to keep the general ban on uranium mining, which is the barrier the plan wishes to remove. The plan therefore speaks against the counter-proposal's demand.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill att Sveriges mineraltillgångar ska kunna utvinnas ansvarsfullt och att förbud som hindrar kärnkraftens utbyggnad rivs. Motförslaget vill visserligen möjliggöra sekundär utvinning, men uttryckligen behålla det generella förbudet mot uranutvinning, vilket är det hinder planen vill bort. Planen talar därför emot motförslagets krav.
- responsible mineral extractiondecisive»Våra rika mineraltillgångar ska kunna utvinnas ansvarsfullt och långsiktigt hållbart.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Our rich mineral resources shall be able to be extracted responsibly and sustainably long-term.”
- new nuclear power»Ny kärnkraft är lösningen för att reparera Sveriges energisystem på lång sikt.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“New nuclear power is the solution to repair Sweden's energy system in the long term.”
- continued mineral extraction»Våra rika mineraltillgångar ska även fortsättningsvis kunna utvinnas på ett« (party programme ↗)“Our rich mineral resources shall continue to be able to be extracted on a”
The plan sees the mineral values in the ground as a major asset, wants to make it easier and faster to open mines and seeks solutions that give the greatest environmental benefit per krona.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan sees the mineral values in the ground as a major asset, wants to make it easier and faster to open mines and seeks solutions that give the greatest environmental benefit per krona. Making use of uranium that is extracted anyway as a byproduct is such efficient resource utilisation and strengthens the supply of critical raw materials. The counter-proposal's demands thus align with the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen ser mineralvärdena i marken som en stor tillgång, vill göra det enklare och snabbare att öppna gruvor och söker de lösningar som ger mest miljönytta per krona. Att ta till vara uran som ändå bryts upp som biprodukt är ett sådant effektivt resursutnyttjande och stärker försörjningen av kritiska råvaror. Motförslagets krav ligger därför i linje med planen.
- make use of mineral valuesdecisive»Värdet på mineraler i marken, på skogar och potentialen för rekreation och turism är enorm på landsbygden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The value of minerals in the ground, forests and the potential for recreation and tourism are enormous in rural areas.”
- easier mining»Det behöver också bli enklare och gå snabbare att öppna gruvor för de mineraler som behövs för exempelvis tillverkning av batterier.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It also needs to become easier and faster to open mines for the minerals needed for, for example, battery manufacturing.”
- environmental efficiency»Sträva efter miljöeffektivitet och hitta de åtgärder som ger mest miljö per krona« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Strive for environmental efficiency and find the measures that give the greatest environmental benefit per krona”
- efficient permission processes»Effektivisera och öka förutsägbarheten i tillståndsprocesserna för gruvnäring, elnätsutbyggnad och industri« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Make permission processes more efficient and increase predictability for mining, electricity grid expansion and industry”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2025/26:NU7)
- Committee report full text (HD01NU7)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2025/26:208 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:203 Förbudet mot utvinning av uran tas bort av Katarina Luhr m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2025/26:216 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:203 Förbudet mot utvinning av uran tas bort av Fredrik Olovsson m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2025/26:272 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:203 Förbudet mot utvinning av uran tas bort av Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (C)
- Motion 2025/26:56 — med anledning av prop. 2024/25:203 Förbudet mot utvinning av uran tas bort av Birger Lahti m.fl. (V)
- Proposition 2024/25:203 — Förbudet mot utvinning av uran tas bort
Source: The Swedish Parliament