Blog

It’s like a scene from the movies.

COVID-19 has not only taken over the headlines all over the world, it has slowed down economic activity, drastically scaled back public life, turned parents into homeschoolers, and sent financial markets into turmoil.

It has also, as Forbes contributors Nives Dolsak and Aseem Prakash point out in a recent piece for the publication – at least temporarily — reduced China’s carbon emissions, and with public life slowing to a crawl or even standstill, likely will do so for other parts of the world.

In the piece, the authors look at the deeper implication for climate policy, specifically the fact that “decarbonization depends on global supply chains for inputs required for electric vehicles, solar panels, and wind turbines.”

They argue that the consequences of disruptions to these supply chains are particularly serious “when inputs come predominantly from a handful of countries,” pointing to China as the lead supplier for REEs and the world’s reliance on supplies from “conflict-ridden and politically unstable countries, such as Congo” for other critical minerals like cobalt.

The bottom-line, they argue, “is that supply disruptions abroad can derail decarbonization at home.”

Dolsak and Prakash walk through the strategic challenges of sourcing inputs that can be found only in specific countries, arguing that “[g]iven the current configurations of the material supply chains, decarbonization could become hostage to Chinese politics, whether political or public health-related.”

They point to policy approaches already underway and options available to diversify supply chains — i.e. legislation to ease the mine permitting process to increase domestic production where possible, relying on R&D to find ways to reduce critical mineral use in products as well as recycling and engaging in multi-stakeholder initiatives improve environmental and labor rights in the mining industry.

They conclude: 

“The coronavirus episode reveals the downside of globalized supply chain and the political perils of allowing China to dominate them. Without a clear mineral supply chain strategy, decarbonization by 2040 or 2050 will be challenging to achieve.”

Fortunately, as we pointed out in a previous post on our blog, “even before the outbreak and ongoing spread of COVID-19 placing a magnifying glass over our resource dependencies, and against the backdrop of the nascent tech war between China and the United States U.S. stakeholders were beginning to take steps to reduce supply chain vulnerabilities, particularly for Rare Earths.” 

The recent emergence of a more strategic approach to mineral resource policy on the part of the United States has laid some important groundwork for tackling the new realities of global supply chains in the wake of coronavirus.  We’ll have to ensure stakeholders don’t lose sight of this focus in light of the myriad of challenges ahead of us.

Rock beats scissors. Scissors beat paper. Copper beats coronavirus. It sounds flippant, but at this moment of utmost seriousness, there’s a truth to it.  In a new piece, senior writer for Fast Company Mark Wilson discusses the thesis of Bill Keevil, professor of environmental healthcare at the University of Southampton, whose research has led him (…) more

In a new piece for RealClear Politics, ARPN’s Daniel McGroarty argues that while the current focus on ending the dangerous dependence on critical medicines needed to combat COVID-19 is more than warranted, Congress and the administration “may want to broaden their focus from critical medicines to critical minerals.” Read his full piece here: Getting Critical (…) more

Over the past few weeks, the spread of the coronavirus has begun to expose the supply chain challenges associated with an over-reliance on foreign raw materials, the effects of which will be felt across broad segments of manufacturing. In a new piece for PennLive Patriot-News, Michael Stumo, CEO of the Coalition for a Prosperous America (…) more

The U.S. Senate may cast a vote on a comprehensive bipartisan energy legislation package that contains provisions pertaining to critical mineral resource supply issues as early as this week.   S. 2657 is the legislative vehicle for the American Energy Innovation Act (AEIA), a package consisting of several pieces of legislation, which reflect the “priorities of (…) more

While many first think of the human dimension and health implications of the recent outbreak and ongoing spread of the coronavirus — and quite rightly, given the potentially  fatal consequences — the crisis with pandemic potential has ramifications that reach far beyond the health sector. In a new piece for Tech Metal News, Shane Lasley takes a (…) more

A new risk tool developed by researchers at the U.S. Geological Survey and its partners identifies 23 metals and minerals relevant to U.S. manufacturing that are at greatest risk to supply disruption. The methodology, entitled “Evaluating the Mineral Commodity Supply Risk of the U.S. Manufacturing Sector” and published in Science Advances was developed to help meet the (…) more

The release of the 2021 presidential federal budget proposal earlier this week held some important news on the critical minerals front.   Following on the heels of the creation of the U.S. Nuclear Fuels Working Group (NFWG), which President Donald Trump had announced in the summer of last year “to develop recommendations for reviving and expanding (…) more

Last week, USGS released its 43rd Mineral Commodity Summaries – a comprehensive snapshot of global mineral production which gives us a window into where we stand as a nation in terms of mineral resource security.   Perhaps most instructive from an ARPN perspective is the chart depicting U.S. Net Import Reliance — previously casually referred to as (…) more