As the key raw material in the battery anode, graphite is the largest component of lithium-ion batteries by weight. In light of “phenomenal demand growth from the EV battery sector and delays to new capacity as well as rising power costs,” the graphite supply chain represents a significant and growing challenge for automakers looking to reduce the carbon footprint of the materials they use for their EVs.

As Fastmarkets consultant Amy Bennett outlines, unlike natural graphite, which is mined and then processed for usage in the battery industry, synthetic graphite utilizes a carbon precursor product – i.e. petroleum coke, needle coke or coal tar pitch – which is then made into graphite via a process called graphitization.

Most graphite production currently takes place in China. A majority of batteries to date use a blend of natural and synthetic graphite, but there may be compelling reasons for a shift towards natural graphite as long as supply chain security can be established.

Arguing that both supply chains have “multiple environmental, social and governance (ESG) concerns, with natural graphite subject to the risks of an ongoing conflict in northern Mozambique that started in 2017,” our friends at Benchmark Mineral Intelligence have taken a closer look how both graphite materials compare, and find that “[t]the production of natural graphite anodes is around 55% less carbon intensive than the average synthetic graphite anode produced in China.”

They add:

“For natural graphite, two-thirds of the carbon emissions come from the spheroidisation process, for which China currently has a monopoly. Spheroidisation is the process in which flake graphite particles are mechanically rounded. This leads to the loss of some material, but yields improvements in the performance of the anode.”

However, while the production of natural graphite is associated with fewer carbon emissions, Benchmark sees its global supply chain remaining fragile, particularly as Mozambique, a major source of natural graphite outside of China, experiences an  ISIS-affiliated terror threat in its northern Cabo Delgado province, from where much of the country’s graphite is sourced.

Looking towards Europe, where almost 70% of natural graphite has been mined in Russia and Ukraine, Moscow’s ongoing war on Ukraine could seriously destabilize the region’s graphite production.

Meanwhile mining in Madagascar, which currently accounts for roughly 10% of global supply is threatened by severe climate events in the form of cyclones.  Finally, there is some phantom natural graphite produced in North Korea, and likely moved into the global supply chain via China – no one’s idea of a socially-responsible source of battery material.

Currently, according to the USGS, the United States is 100% import dependent for its graphite needs, but as ARPN recently pointed out,

“that’s not for lack of known graphite resources.  As USGS noted in February 2022 in its updated U.S. Mineral Deposit Database, Graphite One’s Graphite Creek deposit near Nome, Alaska is America’s largest graphite deposit.  If U.S. Government efforts to develop an American-based EV and lithium-ion battery supply chain have any hope of succeeding, looking for ways to help projects like Graphite Creek down the path to production will be, in a word…. Critical.”

Until then, China’s battery anode dominance could be the West’s Achilles heel in the green energy transition – in defense planners parlance, a potential “single point of failure”:  irrespective of whether we succeed in developing multiple minerals and metals for the battery cathode, if we are unable to meet anode material needs – and we cannot do so sustainably and ESG-friendly without natural graphite — we will not be able to build a rechargeable battery independent of China.

As ARPN outlined:

“The sourcing provisions in the energy passages of the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act, coupled with the recently announced grants to ‘supercharge’ U.S. EV battery and electric grid supply chains are important steps towards mitigating that potential single point of failure.  However, considering the long timelines for permitting for mining and processing projects, decoupling and building out a battery supply chain independent of China will warrant a concerted effort by stakeholders and policy makers to decouple from China.”

The post As Green Energy Push Accelerates, EV Battery Focus Shifts Toward the Anode – A Look at Natural vs. Synthetic Graphite appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

The new Great Game, according to Muggah, foreshadowed by the 2010 rare earths dispute between China and Japan, gained momentum with the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015 which committed countries to significantly reduce greenhouse gases and transition to renewables.

Writes Muggah:

“In order to achieve the agreement’s targets by 2050, more than 60 per cent of installed power capacity will need to come from a combination of solar plants, wind farms, hydropower, bioenergy, geothermal reservoirs and batteries to power electric vehicles. But scaling these climate-friendly technologies comes with a catch: a sixfold increase in the sourcing of so-called critical minerals such as nickel, copper, lithium and cobalt as well as rare earths, by some estimates.

And so while the effort to move away from oil, gas and coal to low-carbon energy sources is essential, it has also unleashed powerful destabilizing forces. Countries are scrambling to secure the minerals needed to power the green transition; competition among major powers to control supply chains could trigger new global security risks.”

Muggah points to China as the undisputed dominant player “when it comes to refining those critical minerals and rare earths, effectively leveraging its state-backed firms, low-cost work force and lax environmental standards to gain a stranglehold on global markets.” Despite its omnipresence in global critical mineral supply chains, he says, China “does not yet dominate the exploration and extraction of critical minerals such as cobalt, lithium or nickel.” As a result, companies with backing from Beijing are “busily scouring international markets for raw materials, from Argentina, Bolivia and Chile to the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Africa and Zambia, but the competition is fierce.”

While Russia is another key player as one of the top producers of palladium, scandium, titanium and nickel, Russia’s war on Ukraine and subsequent sanctions against Russia have slowed down Moscow-backed domestic critical minerals production and processing and external pursuits, further consolidating China’s pole position in the global race for resources.

Muggah laments North American and Western European lack of expediency to build out their own critical mineral supply chains, not least due to most Western countries facing “major hurdles when it comes to accelerating domestic and international production and processing of critical minerals and rare earths, including the high costs of capital investments, long lead times to build out mines and refineries, and stronger environmental and labour standards compared to countries such as China and Russia.”  However, he says, “supply chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine and rising tensions with China – including Chinese threats to curb rare-earth exports to the U.S. – have all served as a wake-up call,” and a new Great Game is on.

He goes on to detail recent steps taken by the U.S. and European Union to diversify its supply chains away from adversaries in general, and China in particular, which both appear to embrace a comprehensive “all-of-the-above” strategic approach, ranging from strengthening domestic production, over strengthening closed-loop concepts to increased “friend shoring.” 

In this context, Muggah believes Canada “will have a consequential role to play in what is shaping up to be one of the defining struggles of our era,” and goes on to discuss Canada’s latest policy initiatives to strengthen critical mineral supply chains.

Muggah says there is reason for “cautious optimism that Canada can achieve its goals,” but that “Canada and its partners still face major obstacles to meet their ambitions, including from China.”   He points to Chinese firms having acquired several key Canadian mines (see ARPN’s recent post on the issue here) and calls for greater scrutiny for mining deals with state-owned mining companies from authoritarian countries, arguing that “Canada will need to broaden its conception of what constitutes national security in relation to critical minerals and rare earths.”

He closes:

“To achieve more strategic autonomy amid the new Great Game, Canada must build more predictable and sustainable supply chains and take a more pro-active global role in driving the global shift to renewable energy. (…) Notwithstanding China’s firm grip on global supply chains of critical minerals and especially rare earths, Canada and its allies can support a more predictable green transition.

This is one game that Canada can and must help the whole world win.”

The question for the United States, where the midterm elections — and with that intensified partisan politics — are just around the corner, is whether policy makers will maintain their newly gained bipartisan focus on the importance of critical mineral supply chains and continue to work towards achieving greater mineral resource independence.

The post A New “Great Game” is Afoot – Are We Able to Keep the Focus on Diversifying Critical Mineral Supply Chains Away from Adversaries appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

Acknowledging their responsibility, the mining sector and associated industries have made significant capital investments and have been harnessing the materials science revolution to meet increased expectations of consumers, society and governments to sustainably and responsibly support the shift.

On a broader level, in a recent post, Seeking Alpha points to the European Copper Institute having found that the “copper industry reduced CO2 emissions by 60% from 1990 to 2020 by investing in efficiency and reducing energy consumption.”

The post adds: “(…) the green initiatives have just started: nowadays, mining of ‘green’ metals (which are metals produced with renewable energy sources and sustainable practices) is a new way to address emissions in the sector,” and points to low-carbon aluminum produced using mostly renewable energy sources, as well as low-carbon nickel.

Meanwhile, a significant disconnect persists in certain circles about both the importance of the mining industry in the green energy shift, and the strides companies have made to reduce their environmental impact. Overcoming that disconnect is the main reason ARPN continues to highlight specific sustainability initiatives in extractive and associated industries. These range from overhauling supply chain policies to ensure suppliers conform to certain environmental and social standards, to incorporating renewable power sources into their operations to offset some of the carbon costs of resource development. (Take a look at our latest roundup here.)

As Congress is weighing legislation that could bring significant changes for critical mineral resource policy, the time has come for another roundup:

• U.S. miner Alcoa has partnered with Alumtek Minerals, a Brisbane, Australia-based company that has developed a a process to extract critical minerals including gallium, vanadium, hafnium and rare earths from bauxite tailings. Having received a grant from the Australian government, the companies will collaborate with a Western Australian government research hub in the hopes to advance the processing technology from proof of concept to full production.
• As part of its full-value mining initiative, global miner Rio Tinto is also targeting waste tailings as a source for critical minerals and other useful consumer products. According to Bloomberg, the company is “currently figuring out ways to extract up to ten so-called critical minerals from copper waste at its mining facility in Utah,”  and in Australia, has partnered with the University of Queensland and Queensland Alumina to bioengineer bauxite residue known as ‘red mud’ into an eco-friendly plant-sustaining soil. Meanwhile, to reduce its carbon footprint, the company is looking to construct a brand new [additional] solar plant at is Weipa bauxite site, in Queensland, Australia. Contracting with energy supplier EDL, the company aims to triple North Queensland local solar power generation with the new plant.
• According to Engineering and Mining Journal, “Rolls-Royce and Flanders Electric have agreed to develop a retrofit solution for hybridizing mining-class haul trucks with mtu [motor-and-turbine union] engines, batteries and hybrid control systems, and Flanders drive train solutions.” A recently-signed Memorandum of understanding between the two companies enables them to “offer a scalable retrofit kit for hybridizing mining trucks in a wide range of mining applications.”
• In its efforts to operate more efficiently and sustainably, China-focused mine Silvercorp began constructing a one million tonne-per-year waste rock treatment plant which turns waste produced at its flagship Ying multi-mine project into aggregate. The company is further exploring the use of mine tailings in the manufacture of ceramic products.

These examples provide just a single snapshot into sustainability initiatives underway at this point in time, but of course more can, should, and is being done. Count on ARPN to continue to feature these initiatives going forward.

The post Green Energy Shift Requires a Revolution in Materials Science appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The American Resources Policy Network has
 announced that Tracy Weslosky, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief for InvestorIntel, a global investment source for the resource, energy and technology sectors, and a member of the American Resources Policy Network panel of experts, will expand her role at the organization to serve as Advisor on Advanced Materials.

Founder and CEO for ProEdge, an online publisher and media production company since 2001, which owns InvestorIntel, Weslosky is also the Managing Director of REE Stocks Company Ltd. (REE Stocks). Weslosky is an authority in the resource, oil and gas, energy, technology and entertainment industry sectors. Her more-than-twenty years of experience encompass owning her own boutique investment banking and investor relations firm, as well as numerous speaking engagements and publications in the rare earths and critical materials sector, including the renowned REE Handbook – the ultimate guide on rare earths.

Says American Resources Principal Daniel McGroarty: “We’re thrilled to have Tracy expand her role at ARPN to advise us on advanced materials. With the global race for resources in full swing, the importance of this broad and fast-evolving field cannot be stressed enough, and Tracy undoubtedly has her finger on the pulse here.”

He adds: “Tracy’s vast experience in the sector will be an asset to furthering the American Resources Policy Network’s mission to promote the exploration and development of the vast mineral resources we’re fortunate to have beneath our soil, and I look forward to collaborating with her.”

To learn more about the American Resources team and our panelists,
 please visit our experts page.

The post American Resources Policy Network announces new Advisor on Advanced Materials appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Daniel McGroarty, American Resources Policy Network President, provided testimony today on Capitol Hill concerning the EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment, a major environmental study in Alaska.

“The problem with the Assessment has always been that EPA is preempting the established Federal permitting process to evaluate a hypothetical mine,” said McGroarty. “Every issue raised in the Assessment could easily be reviewed within the existing permitting process, and there is simply no need for the expensive, new “pre-permitting process” that the EPA has created here.”

McGroarty addressed the EPA’s use of scientific studies in the assessment, particularly those conducted by Dr. Ann Maest, formerly Managing Scientist for Stratus Consulting. As McGroarty noted in a letter to Senators Boxer and Vitter earlier this year, Dr. Maest publicly disavowed environmental research she had conducted in Ecuador that was used to win an $18 billion judgment against Chevron, calling her integrity into question.

Furthermore in June, on behalf of the Northwest Mining Association, the global water and environmental management firm Schlumberger published an analysis of “Kuipers, Maest et al. 2006,” one of the studies that forms the basis of the EPA’s assessment. The Schlumberger report could not replicate the hydrological data presented in the Kuipers/Maest study – a fundamental tenet of sound scientific research. It also found a ‘backward bias’ inherent in any hypothetical construct, noting that the Kuipers/Maest study draws on a ‘preponderance’ of case studies taken from mines that operated before the modern regulatory era.

“Does it constitute ‘sound science’ to argue against a proposed mine based on what happened at other mines operated to other standards — 20, 30 or 40 years ago?” said McGroarty. “Would we use such a backwards-biased yardstick to judge the safety of a new airplane? A new car? A new medicine?”

McGroarty called for EPA to conduct an independent and impartial investigation of the use of studies conducted by Maest, and cautioned against using the Assessment to prevent Pebble from entering the Federal permitting process.

###

The American Resources Policy Network is a non-profit education and public policy research organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. For more information, visit americanresources.org.

Details on the Congressional Hearing: The U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space & Technology, Subcommittee on Oversight. 2318 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. 20515. “EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment – A Factual Review of a Hypothetical Scenario.” Aug 1, 2013 at 1:00pm:
http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-oversight-hearing-epa-s-bristol-bay-watershed-assessment-factual-review

ARPN Letter to Senators Boxer and Vitter concerning the use of studies conducted by Maest in the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment:
http://americanresources.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/ARPN-Letter-on-EPA-and-Stratus-Consulting-May-6-2013.pdf

Schlumberger/Northwest Mining Association Analysis of Kuipers, Maest et al. 2006: http://www.nwma.org/pdf/NWMA%20public%20comments%20final%20june29%202013%20Bristol%20Bay%20with%20appendix.pdf

Wall Street Journal Op-Ed, “A Potential Copper Bonanza Runs Afoul of the EPA,” By Daniel McGroarty: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324436104578580092566535574.html

The post Congressional Committee Investigates EPA’s Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

The American Resources Policy Network has been invited by the U.S. Defense Logistics Agency/Strategic Materials (DLA/SM) and the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) to take part in the 2015 National Defense Stockpile (NDS) Requirements Report process, assessing potential shortfalls in strategic and critical metals.

“We’re honored that the Defense Logistics Agency and the Institute for Defense Analyses have asked American Resources to be part of the stockpile requirements assessment,” said Daniel McGroarty, President and founder of ARPN. “This is an indication of the progress ARPN has made in establishing
our programs and our experts as leaders in all aspects of resource development, both practice and policy.”

ARPN has been asked to organize a number of confidential, invitation-only sessions on strategic and critical metals identified by DLA and IDA. The first session takes place today.

The National Defense Stockpile Requirements Report estimates potential shortfalls in the supply of strategic and critical materials that could occur in the context of a future national security emergency. To mitigate potential risks associated with the shortfalls, the Report considers multiple mitigation options, ranging from traditional government stockpiling, contingency supplier arrangements, and production-capacity building, to material substitution or use of alternatives, and material re-use/recycling. Materials assessed for the report are those identified as essential to both U.S. civilian and military demand during a postulated national emergency.

By statute, the Report is submitted by the Secretary of Defense to the Congressional Armed Services Committees.

ARPN’s 2012 Washington Conference focused on Critical Metals Strategy, and the ARPN study, released in concurrence with the conference – Daniel McGroarty and Sandra Wirtz’s Reviewing Risk: Critical Metals & National Security – featured the American Resources Risk Pyramid, 46 metals and minerals recognized in unclassified defense and national security reports as being critical and strategic to U.S. defense systems and applications.

Download the Risk Report here.

The post American Resources Policy Network Invited to Take Part in National Defense Stockpile Report appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

WASHINGTON, D.C. 10/26 – The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) has announced that it will hold a conference to examine the link between rare earths, critical metals, energy, and national security. The event, entitled Rare Earths, Critical Metals, and National Security will take place on Wednesday, November 2, and is the first metals conference to focus on national defense.

“It’s time to bring the national security side of critical metals into the discussion,” said Daniel McGroarty, president of the American Resources Policy Network, which is co-sponsoring the conference.  “Security of resource supply is critical to our competitiveness, our technological advancement — and to the weapons systems on which the U.S. depends.”

McGroarty, Gareth Hatch and Kent Butts, American Resources experts, will attend the conference as moderator and panelists, respectively. McGroarty will moderate a panel entitled “Specialty Metals: Assessing Strategic Need” on which Butts will serve as a panelist, while Hatch will serve as a panelist on the “Rare Earth Elements” panel.

The featured speaker is Dr. David Diamond, Team Leader of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Critical Materials Strategy Report, who will present his lecture, “Energy Security as National Security.” Other speakers include individuals from the Department of Defense’s Logistic Agency, the Department of Energy, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Boeing Corporation.

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) will deliver the luncheon keynote, while Congressmen Mike Coffman (R-CO) and Doug Lamborn (R-CO) will also appear to discuss strategic resource supply with regard to current legislation.  All three legislators have pending congressional bills relating to critical metals or rare earths.

Rare earths are essential components of our national defense systems and can be found in items ranging from surveillance devices to weapons technology. Despite their widespread application, a 2010 U.S. Defense Stockpile report states, “[U.S.] defense leaders do not necessarily know exactly which minerals they use in which systems in what amounts, [and] where the minerals came from…”

That the U.S. is almost entirely dependent on China for these materials is also a major cause for concern. The NCPA conference will be critical in exploring a long-term solution for these issues.

###

“Rare Earths, Critical Metals, and National Security” will be held on November 2 in the Capitol Hill Hyatt Regency in Washington D.C.  To register to attend, please contact Carolyn Needham at 202.220.3195 or Carolyn.needham@ncpa.org

The post National Center for Policy Analysis to Hold Capitol Hill Conference appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

Washington, D.C. – The American Resources Policy Network announced today that it would expand on its messaging in favor of exploring the available non-fuel resources in America by launching a campaign for copper, antimony, and lithium – elements readily available in the country, yet not adequately developed.

“We have consistently argued that America’s metals and minerals dependency, which threatens our strategic and economic future, stretches well beyond exotic high-tech metals like rare earths,” said ARPN’s Daniel McGroarty. “It also impacts other mineral resources, including mainstay industrial metals.”

In the coming months, American Resources will embark on an informational campaign to highlight the breadth of the nation’s metals and minerals needs by drilling down into three critically important elements that exemplify America’s unnecessary, and potentially dangerous, dependence on foreign resources.

More about copper, antimony, and lithium:

Copper:

• A mainstay metal that continues to be a critical material in electronics, the construction industry, durable goods, hybrid vehicles, and military applications.
• According to the USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries, there are 550 million tons of copper in identified and undiscovered resources in the U.S.
• In 1993, America’s net import dependency rate for copper stood at only 7 percent; today, that number is closer to 30 percent.

Antimony:

• The use of antimony dates back to ancient times, when it was primarily utilized for medicinal purposes. Today, it is a key component in micro-electronics, and has many diversified uses for commercial and military applications.
• While significant deposits of minable antimony exist in the U.S., our import dependency rate for antimony is 93 percent, with China reportedly contributing around 90 percent of global output.
• The supply challenges associated with the versatile mineral against the background of surging demand have made antimony the top-ranked critical mineral on the British Geological Survey’s new Risk List 2011.

Lithium:

• An element with important utility for our energy needs, our import dependency rate stands at 43 percent, in spite of the fact that identified lithium resources in the United States total 4 million tons.
• Much of the world’s current supply comes from Chile, Argentina, and China, making potential supply disruptions a cause of concern.

The campaign will launch with the start of  what American Resources is deeming “Copper Month” on October 1, 2011.

“We will be dedicating an entire month to the discussion of copper-related issues,” says McGroarty. “To support our efforts, we have launched a microsite – an informational hub – that provides insight into copper’s many utilities, the role it plays in the generation of economic growth, social well-being and economic security, and any associated challenges.”

The American Resources’ “Copper Month” of October will be followed by “Antimony Month” and “Lithium Month” respectively, so stay tuned for upcoming spotlighting efforts on our blog, our Facebook page, and on Twitter. Please visit www.CopperMatters.org to learn more about the importance of this critical metal.

With the global race for resources heating up, industry, policy makers and consumers alike cannot afford to ignore the United States’ looming resource deficit.  We hope that through our “drill-down” efforts will we’re doing our part to help draw attention to the issues at hand.

###

The American Resource Policy Network is a Carmot Strategic Group venture. For more information, visit www.americanresources.org or contact Director of Research Sandra Wirtz at americanresourcespn@gmail.com.

The post American Resources Policy Network Launches Informational Campaign on Copper, Antimony, and Lithium appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

The Critical Rare Earths Report features detailed evaluations of the supply challenges and qualitative rankings for individual REEs. Built on a set of four global supply projections for rare earth oxides, the study is packed full of visual data from now through 2017.

Highly relevant from a geopolitical perspective, the report also takes a look at the origins of the new sources of supply outside of China, and it examines how long China’s dominant position will last for each critical and non-critical REE.

The bottom line: While the days of Chinese dominance of the rare earths supply are numbered, the United States has a lot of catching up to do. Australian-based projects present themselves as the key non-Chinese alternative for the REE supply from 2013 onward, but the U.S. and Canada, while holding significant REE deposits, don’t “appear” on the scene until much later.

Download and print a free copy of Gareth Hatch’s Critical Rare Earths Report here.

The post Expert Gareth Hatch releases eye-opening Critical Rare Earths Report appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

Anne Darconte’s twenty years of public affairs experience include the
development and management of grassroots advocacy and Get Out The Vote
(GOTV) programs for organizations in the natural resources industry
such as the NPRA, the American Chemistry Council, and the BASF
Corporation.  Having focused primarily on ensuring that the U.S. has a
sustainable supply of critical resources, Mrs. Darconte’s areas of
expertise also include chemical security, international trade, and
research and development tax credit issues.

Captain Jackson’s naval career encompassed a period of twenty-five
years as a Surface Warfare Officer with at-sea assignments primarily
in the Pacific Fleet, with later assignments in the Joint Chiefs of
Staff organization and on the personal staff of the Chief of Naval
Operations as the Congressional Policy Coordinator. Subsequent to his
time in the U.S. Navy, Captain Jackson covered various issues related
to technology development for industrial preparedness as well as
international defense coordination on the staff of the American
Defense Preparedness Association (ADPA), now the National Defense
Industrial Association (NDIA).

To learn more about the American Resources team and our panelists,
please visit our experts page.

The post Volunteer Directors to oversee American Resources Policy Network appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.