-->
American Resources Policy Network
Promoting the development of American mineral resources.
  • resource dependence

  • HOMEPAGE >> BLOG >> resource dependence
  • European Union Pushes Ahead With Attempt to Create Battery Manufacturing Value Chain in Europe

    While the United States is finally taking steps to approach mineral resource policy in a comprehensive and strategic fashion, the European Union got a head start several years ago, and has since begun enacting mineral resource policy initiatives within the context of its raw materials strategy.  With its ambitious 2050 low-carbon vision, and the rise of battery tech (most recently visualized by Visual Capitalist with new data provided by our friends at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence) it comes as no surprise that the European Union places a strong emphasis on the circular economy model and battery technology as core tenets of its mineral resource policy.

    Against this backdrop, the European Commission in October of last year launched the European Battery Alliance (EBA), with the objective to “create a competitive manufacturing value chain in Europe with sustainable battery cells at its core.” 

    The rationale behind the EBA is that the battery “will represent a high proportion of the value added in the car of the future.”  With the car industry a major player in the European economy, the aim is to retain as much of the value creation in Europe as possible” in order to minimize disruptions in the supply chain. Meanwhile, the EU considers itself “a leader in many sectors of the battery value chain with great potential in recycling and the circular economy.”  The Strategic Action Plan for Batteries adopted in May of this year represents a comprehensive set of concrete measures with the goal to “develop an innovative, sustainable and competitive battery ‘ecosystem’ in Europe,” and the Commission earlier this month announced that “the first pilot production facilities are being built and further projects are announced to establish the EU as the lead player in the strategic area of battery innovation and manufacturing.” 

    While praising the European Union’s initiative as an effort to “foster communication and co-operation, encourage consortiums and use existing funding better,” the Financial Times editorial board this week argues that Europe’s push may end up being too little too late as “Asian rivals with scale and expertise are building capacity in Europe, including South Korea’s LG Chem in Poland, Samsung SDI in Hungary and China’s CATL in Germany. The likes of BMW and VW have signed big contracts with them.”

    The conclusion the editorial board draws for the European Union applies equally for the United States:

    “Battery technology is (…) the kind of area where co-ordinated EU-level action, if done well, could make a difference. Brussels and commission vice-president Maros Sefcovic, who has made the plan something of a personal project, are right to try. Falling even further behind now could leave Europe struggling for decades to catch up — and put countless jobs at risk.” 

    The U.S., too, could benefit from a more coordinated policy approach to battery technology – and more broadly to the mineral resource sector.  With global race to corner the market heating up, isn’t it time we put a comprehensive resource strategy in place?
    Share
  • ARPN Expert: To Counter China’s Mineral Resource Dominance, U.S. Apathy About Critical Minerals Must End  

    Followers of ARPN know that China is the big elephant in the room when it comes to the United States’ critical mineral resource supply issues.  As ARPN expert panel member Ned Mamula, an adjunct scholar in geosciences at the Center for the Study of Science, Cato Institute, and “Rare Mettle” author Ann Bridges write in a new piece for National Review:

    “Where U.S.–China trade and tariff issues are concerned, China now holds a powerful trump card. Many of the advanced-technology and strategic-defense systems upon which our nation depends will not function without Chinese rare earth parts — and alternative parts makers are not in place to fill our needs. Therefore, it might be a bad day at the bargaining table for the U.S. if and when China decides to play its rare earth card.”

    To explain the United States’ retreat from being the world’s top minerals producer and exporter in the 1990s and China’s mineral resource dominance, Mamula and Bridges offer a point-by-point comparison of Chinese policies  “with the results of past U.S. minerals policies and sentiment about mining — ranging from apathy about critical minerals to open hostility toward their domestic production.”

    While the comparison paints a bleak picture, there are ways “out of this mineral-dependency mess.” Friends of ARPN won’t be surprised that Mamula and Bridges point to presidential executive order (EO 13817), which has set the stage for domestic mineral resource reform.  The proof remains in the pudding and the Congressional record since the announcement of the executive order has been somewhat mixed.

    However, the bottom line, according to Mamula and Bridges stands:

    “As informed citizens, we should embrace and not shrink from U.S. mineral wealth. It is an important part of our American resource endowment. Like the Canadians, Australians, and other resource-rich nations, we should insist on and applaud a vibrant mining industry. Investment in the technology and energy sectors now needs to include mining, too, as it supplies us with so much and can also contribute mightily to the GDP.

    The math is simple: More American mining = less Chinese mineral imports.

    The only real, sustainable pushback against the Chinese mineral-industry juggernaut, which is burying the U.S. with critical mineral imports, is more domestic mining. There really is no other way.”

    Perhaps the release of the Administration’s long-awaited defense-industrial base study, which we’re expecting any day now as per the Defense Department’s top acquisition official, will inject some fresh momentum into domestic mineral resource policy overhaul efforts.  With Rare Earths particularly at risk, the fragility of the U.S. defense supply chain looms large.

    Share
  • Resource Policy’s Butterfly Effect – South Africa’s Landownership Issues to Cripple U.S. Defense Arsenal?

    Can the taking of a farm in South Africa cripple the American defense arsenal?  We’re about to find out – says ARPN’s principal Daniel McGroarty in a new piece for Investor’s Business Daily. Invoking the so-called “Butterfly Effect” – an expression used to describe the phenomenon whereby a minute localized change in a complex system [...]
  • A “Dangerous Dependence:”  Mineral Resource Security Goes Mainstream

    In recent weeks, we have seen a flurry of articles and commentaries in national publications discussing reforms to address our ever-growing reliance on foreign mineral resources.  The two most recent examples are member of the ARPN expert panel Jeffery A. Green’s piece in Real Clear Defense entitled “Dangerous Dependence on China for Critical Minerals Runs [...]
  • Happy Birthday, America – Onward to Resource Independence Day?

    It’s that time of the year again – we load up our shopping carts with fireworks and burger buns, and gear up for parades to honor of the men and women who have fought, and continue our safeguard our freedom today. Many of us will have already traveled this week – and according to AAA, [...]
  • Critical Mineral List Finalized – Now Comes the Hard Part

    “Identifying which minerals are ‘critical’ is the easy part. Working out what to do about them is going to be much harder.”  – That’s the conclusion Reuters columnist Andy Home draws in his recent piece on the current Administration’s efforts to develop a strategy to reduce import reliance for metals considered “critical to the economic and [...]
  • The Daily Caller: DOI Critical Minerals List Highlights United States’ Over-Reliance on Foreign Mineral Resources

    Heavily quoting from ARPN’s statement on the issue, The Daily Caller’s Michael Bastasch earlier this month reported on the Department of the Interior’s finalized list of minerals deemed critical for U.S. national security. Writes Bastasch: “President Donald Trump’s administration’s release of a list of 35 critical minerals highlights just how reliant the U.S. is on [...]
  • ARPN’s Daniel McGroarty Comments on DOI’s Release of Final Critical Minerals List

    The Department of the Interior released its final list of Critical Minerals today. The following is ARPN principal Daniel McGroarty’s statement on the list: “DOI issued its final list of Critical Minerals, unchanged at 35.  What we see is the degree of US dependency – the US is 100% import-dependent for 14 of the 35 [...]
  • Congressional Western Caucus Members Call for Expansion of Critical Minerals List

    Earlier this month, members of the Congressional Western Caucus sent a letter to Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross, and Acting Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Mary Neumayr calling for the inclusion of additional metals and minerals into the draft critical minerals list released by Secretary Zinke [...]
  • Mamula & Moore on Mineral Resource Policy: Time for a Change in Strategy and Philosophy

    “Why is the United States reliant on China and Russia for strategic minerals when we have more of these valuable resources than both these nations combined?” Stephen Moore, senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an economic consultant with Freedom Works, and ARPN expert panel member Ned Mamula, a geoscientist and adjunct scholar at the [...]

Archives