The United States' mining industry has long been a global leader in the extraction of traditional commodities like coal, gold, and copper, but it has notably lagged in the mining of minor metals, particularly those essential for the green transition, such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements. These minerals are crucial for the production of electric vehicle (EV) batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, and other technologies central to achieving a low-carbon economy. The lag in domestic mining of these critical minerals stems from a confluence of factors, including complex regulatory frameworks, stringent environmental policies, lack of investment in emerging supply chains, and shifting political priorities.
The U.S. regulatory environment is one of the most significant hurdles for the mining of minor metals. Mining projects in the U.S. are subject to extensive federal, state, and local regulations, which aim to protect both the environment and local communities. While these regulations are necessary for ensuring responsible mining practices, they often contribute to lengthy and complex approval processes, which can stretch over several years, making it difficult to meet the rapidly changing global demand for critical minerals.
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and other environmental protection laws mandate rigorous environmental assessments before mining operations can commence. These assessments require not only comprehensive reviews of the environmental impacts of a proposed mine but also public comment periods and opportunities for legal challenges. This bureaucratic red tape can delay projects for years, far longer than the timelines needed to respond to urgent mineral shortages.
One critical example of this issue is the time required to secure permits for new mining projects. For instance, the permitting process for a lithium mine can take 5 to 10 years, which is significantly longer than the 1 to 3 years it often takes for similar projects in countries with more streamlined regulatory processes, like Australia and Canada. As a result, while the global demand for these metals increases rapidly, the U.S. is unable to develop its own resources quickly enough to meet that demand, leading to increased dependency on foreign imports, particularly from China and Africa.
Additionally, many of the minerals that the U.S. needs for its clean energy transition are found in areas with significant ecological sensitivity, such as national parks, protected forests, and indigenous lands. The intersection of mining with environmental protection in these regions has led to conflicts and significant opposition from environmental groups, local communities, and indigenous peoples. For example, the proposed Lithium Nevada Corp. mine in Nevada, which would be one of the largest domestic lithium projects, has faced significant opposition due to concerns over the potential impact on local water sources and wildlife. Such conflicts make it even more difficult to develop new mines, as opposition groups may litigate and stall projects for years.
While environmental policies are essential to ensuring that mining activities are sustainable, some policies are too restrictive or misaligned with the demands of modern-day critical mineral extraction. For instance, the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act place limits on mining operations in areas that could potentially disrupt protected species habitats or pollute nearby water sources. While these regulations are necessary to protect biodiversity and ensure water quality, they can also effectively block access to mineral-rich regions, especially those that may house endangered species or important water resources.
The Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act further complicate the regulatory environment by imposing stringent air and water quality standards, which can be expensive and time-consuming to meet. For example, mining companies often need to invest heavily in mitigation technologies to reduce emissions or manage waste disposal in an environmentally friendly manner. While these technologies are crucial for responsible mining, they can increase the cost of mining operations and make U.S.-based projects less competitive relative to those in countries with looser environmental regulations.
Furthermore, NEPA reviews and other regulatory steps can lead to legal battles that stall projects for years. Even if an environmental assessment clears a project, opponents often sue in court, delaying the development of critical mines. The public consultation process mandated by NEPA gives local communities and activists the opportunity to challenge mining proposals, further slowing the approval process. The U.S. has seen several major mining projects delayed or canceled due to litigation, despite the increasing need for these minerals.
The U.S. once had a robust, domestic supply chain that spanned from mining to refining to manufacturing. However, in recent decades, much of the processing and refining of critical minerals has moved abroad, particularly to China, which controls much of the global market for the processing of lithium, rare earth elements, and cobalt. As a result, the U.S. now faces significant challenges in developing its own domestic supply chain for these materials.
To make a lithium-ion mine in the U.S. profitable, it is not enough to simply extract the minerals; the raw materials must be processed and refined into usable forms. Without a fully integrated supply chain, U.S. mining projects are at a disadvantage compared to international competitors that can produce critical minerals more cheaply due to economies of scale and existing infrastructure in countries like China, which not only controls large portions of the mining operations but also dominates the global supply chain for processing and manufacturing these materials.
While the US government has made strides in increasing investment in domestic mining and processing infrastructure, the U.S. is still struggling to develop the required capacity to support the green energy transition. The U.S. remains heavily dependent on foreign suppliers for processed materials, which increases vulnerability to supply chain disruptions, geopolitical risks, and price fluctuations. Moreover, the lack of processing capacity and a fragmented supply chain means the U.S. is not capturing the economic benefits associated with processing and manufacturing critical minerals.
Mining in the U.S. also faces significant political resistance. While there is broad recognition of the importance of securing a stable supply of critical minerals for the energy transition, local communities, environmental organizations, and politicians are often unwilling to support new mining operations due to concerns over environmental degradation, health impacts, and disruptions to local economies.
The "Not In My Backyard" (NIMBY) sentiment is widespread in regions where mineral deposits are located, as communities fear the negative impacts of mining, such as pollution, water shortages, and loss of biodiversity. The opposition is particularly strong in areas where mining operations would affect indigenous communities, such as in parts of the Western U.S. and Alaska, where sacred lands and wildlife are often at risk. This resistance makes it difficult to build the social license needed to gain community support for new projects.
The growing political influence of environmental groups has also led to the adoption of policies that limit mining activities in ecologically sensitive regions, further restricting access to critical mineral resources. While these policies are often driven by valid concerns about environmental protection, they can inadvertently hinder the domestic development of critical minerals at a time when the U.S. should be working to secure its supply chain for a clean energy future.
In order to address these challenges and increase domestic mining of critical minerals, the U.S. must pursue strategic reforms in its mining policies. This includes streamlining the permitting process for mining projects, updating environmental regulations to better balance sustainability with the urgency of securing critical minerals, and investing in the domestic processing and refining capabilities necessary to support the low-carbon economy.
The Biden administration has made some strides in addressing these issues, including increased funding for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to identify new mineral deposits, but further action is needed. This includes incentivizing private investment in mining and processing infrastructure, encouraging public-private partnerships, and ensuring that environmental protection and resource extraction are not seen as mutually exclusive goals.
Additionally, the U.S. should explore the adoption of best practices in responsible mining, such as those promoted by the Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance (IRMA) and the Good Neighbor Agreement (GNA), which have proven successful in balancing environmental concerns with the need for mineral extraction.
The U.S. is lagging in the mining of minor metals due to a combination of regulatory challenges, environmental policies, lack of integrated supply chains, and political opposition. While these policies and protections are crucial for ensuring responsible and sustainable mining practices, they often create barriers to the rapid development of the domestic mining sector. To address this issue, the U.S. must adopt a more streamlined, predictable regulatory framework that balances environmental protection with the urgent need for critical minerals. By doing so, the U.S. can become a leader in securing the minerals necessary for a clean energy future, reducing its dependence on foreign sources, and strengthening its national security in the process.
Andersen M, Noailly J. Environmental Regulations in the Mining Sector and Their Effect on Technological Innovation. In: Daly A, Humphreys D, Raffo J, Valacchi G, eds. Global Challenges for Innovation in Mining Industries. Intellectual Property, Innovation and Economic Development. Cambridge University Press; 2022:142-171.
Badakhshan, N., Shahriar, K., Afraei, S., & Bakhtavar, E. (2023). Determining the environmental costs of mining projects: A comprehensive quantitative assessment. Resources Policy, 82, 103561.
https://www.oxfam.org.au/what-we-do/economic-inequality/mining/
https://www.csis.org/analysis/critical-minerals-and-role-us-mining-low-carbon-future