A new Wilson Center policy brief “offers an overview of key policy considerations in securing a reliable, sustainable, and affordable supply of some of the most important commodities of the 21st century: critical minerals.”
U.S. Governance on Critical Minerals
The Wilson Center Environmental Change and Security Program’s (ECSP) new policy brief, U.S. Governance on Critical Minerals is the latest addition to the ongoing efforts by the Center’s ECSP research team in what is already a vital ECSP library of resources about the future of Critical Minerals.
Key Findings from the Policy Brief
- Critical minerals, such as cobalt, lithium, nickel, and rare earth elements, undergird the digital economy – everything from MRIs to smart phones – but also modern military technology and the energy transition. Once the global economy recovers from the pandemic slowdown, commercial forecasts suggest explosive demand growth for critical minerals in the coming decades. The world needs far more of these materials, but hardrock mining and refining take time and capital, and tend to be destructive to the environment and host communities. Recycling and reclamation from waste streams are feasible but are relatively expensive or technologically immature.
- The United States and key allies, such as Australia and Canada, have significant mineral wealth and competitive international mining companies, but a number of other countries dominate critical mineral markets. China and Russia, in particular, are major producers at home and around the world, but they tend to approach mining in a way that encourages corruption, undermines the environment, runs roughshod over community rights, and uses non-market tools. Other important producers of specific minerals include (but are not limited to) Brazil, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Indonesia, the Philippines, and South Africa.
- While the current and previous administrations and past Congresses have launched important initiatives to improve U.S. critical minerals policy—including landmark changes in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Inflation Reduction Act, and CHIPS and Science Act—there is still room to adopt more policies for a better, smarter, cleaner and fairer approach to mining.
What Next? Opportunities and Options
The Wilson Center’s ECSP Research Team offers the following forward-thinking ideas:
Grow the Domestic Supply of Minerals
- Increase responsible and sustainable domestic exploration, production, processing, recycling, and recovery from tailings and brines.
- Improve Capacity by:
- Strengthening governance. The U.S. government should formalize largely ad hoc interagency and federal cooperation mechanisms, build on and revise the 2019 federal strategy, and identify a policy lead that can manage the integration of domestic and foreign minerals policy. While Canada has circumstances that differ from those of the United States, including mineral ownership rights, the country’s national strategy may offer a guide; and
- Facilitating information-gathering. will sharply increase the demand for certain minerals, including cobalt and lithium. Congress increased resources for the U.S. Geological Survey in 2022 to improve documentation of mineral reserves in the United States, horizon scan for future supply challenges, and characterize changing demand for minerals.
- Expanding human resources. There are overall gaps in the U.S. technical workforce in mining, geology, and related STEM fields; the Government Accountability Office cites this shortfall as a major reason for slow mine permitting in the United States. The Inflation Reduction Act’s increase in resources for staffing is essential; more support for training and education would also be beneficial.
Increase the Global Supply of Minerals
Any failure to engage productively with other countries is ceding the economic and strategic advantage to China (and Russia to a lesser extent), potentially with far-reaching effects. But that doesn’t mean the United States should compete on China’s terms. The reliability and credibility of U.S. companies, as well as those of allies and partners, have the potential to be a competitive advantage, particularly with the right U.S. government investments and other incentives.
Reduce Demand
Finally, increasing supply at home and around the world is not enough; these materials are inherently limited (or at least not always commercially viable), and mining and refining of materials will always have costs, especially for local communities and ecosystems. Furthermore, as more countries around the world join the digital economy and make a clean energy transition, the demand for these materials will continue to grow. Electric vehicles in particular will sharply increase the demand for certain minerals, including cobalt and lithium
For a direct link to the policy brief, go here:
OODA Special Report: Digital Transformation in the Materials Sector- Optimizing The Business of Chemicals, Metals, Mining
A Warning for the U.S. Chip Industry: Russian Retaliation Could Hit Supply of Key Materials
Open-Source Intelligence Resources: The USGS 2022 List of Critical Minerals
