Mining metals for clean energy proving a hard sell politically
Environmental concerns, industry costs are formidable stumbling blocks
“You don’t see many Democrats arguing for more mining projects. But the need is only going to go up. China, they can throw state dollars at it and think big. We don’t have that.”
Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-calif.
WASHINGTON – Earlier this year the U.S. Geological Survey reported the United States had more lithium reserves than all but three countries in South America — more than China and more than Australia, the world’s largest lithium miner.
That should have been good news. Republicans and Democrats alike have clamored for years to reduce U.S. reliance on China’s sprawling supply chain for lithium ion batteries, vital to not only consumer electronics but the burgeoning electric vehicle industry. But even as President Joe Biden has pledged to support the expansion of mining operations of lithium, nickel and other minerals and metals need to make the transition to clean energy, it has proved a hard sell politically.
While American politicians largely agree the United States needs to lock down supplies as nations worldwide move to address climate change, the massive costs of funding the industry, along with the pollution associated with mining, are proving formidable stumbling blocks. Rep. Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat pushing for federal funding to expand domestic mining of lithium and other materials, said opposition across the political spectrum has emerged, from Republicans opposed to funding clean energy to Democrats concerned about the environmental implications “You don’t see many Democrats arguing for more mining projects,” he said at a recent event hosted by the advocacy group Securing America’s Future Energy. “But the need is only going to go up. China, they can throw state dollars at it and think big. We don’t have that.”
Nations worldwide have pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by mid-century, requiring a rapid shift from oil and other fossil fuels upon which the world’s energy system and economy are based around. In their place will be batterypowered cars and a larger power grid connecting wind turbines, solar panels and battery systems. That will re
quire an exponential increase in the mining of so-called critical minerals, to be completed in a matter of decades.
Last year, the International Energy Agency, which advises governments worldwide on energy, estimated that to reach net zero goals, the world will need to increase lithium production more than 40 times during the next 20 years. Nickel and graphite production would need to increase 19 and 25 times respectively. Cobalt, which is principally mined in the Democratic Republic of Congo, would need to grow 20 times.
Lithium and nickel mining is increasing, but nowhere near the pace needed to meet climate goals.
“Just the sheer quantitative value we need to ramp up, it’s an extraordinary business opportunity but it’s also pretty daunting,” said Harry Godfrey, managing director at Advanced Energy Economy, a trade group representing clean energy technology firms. “We know the market is there in the long term but in the short term to medium term, there’s a lot of risk factors (the mining) industry is weighing, which creates some hesitancy on the part of capital.”
Chief among them is whether countries will move beyond clean energy pledges to policy.
Outside of Europe, countries have been slow to adopt policies to replace fossil fuels with clean energy out of concern of raising energy prices. In the United States, for instance, Biden has pulled back on policies designed to reduce U.S. oil production and authorized an increase in exports of liquefied natural gas amid the sharp rise in energy prices and efforts to sanction Russian oil and gas.
Then there is the matter of getting government approval for mining projects.
Only one
Only a single lithium mine operates in the United States, the Silver Peak mine in Nevada. Biden announced in March he would use the Defense Production Act, which gives the president increased powers to protect national security, to increase domestic production of lithium, cobalt and other materials.
“We need to end our longterm reliance on China and other countries for inputs that will power the future,” he said.
But how far Biden is willing to extend his support to developing mines that often abut Native American lands and federally protected wilderness remains to be seen.
In northern Minnesota, the Chilean mining corporation Antofagasta has struggled for 10 years to win approval of a copper, nickel, cobalt and platinum mine they say would support the production of 7 million electric vehicles, amid protests the project would damage the federally protected network of lakes and marshes named Boundary Waters.
“Since (filing our application for environmental review in 2019), our project has been subject to regulatory delays and now, 27 months later, review has not yet begun and in fact, has been halted,” Julie Padilla, chief regulatory officer at Twin Metals Minnesota, a subsidiary of Antofagasta, testified before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee last month. “Our situation is not an isolated case. In fact, delays and cancellations are regular occurrences for mining projects in this country.”
The difficulties in getting mining permits in the United States and Europe has pushed production overseas, often to countries such as China and Russia with which the United States has been at odds for years. Even in cases where mines are located in allied nations such as Australia, the lithium, cobalt and other materials are shipped to China for processing. The International Energy Agency estimates China refines 35 percent of the world’s nickel, 50 to 70 percent of lithium and cobalt, and almost 90 percent of rare earth elements.
And considering the emissions and waste streams associated with processing lithium and other critical minerals, not to mention high labor costs here, locating such refineries in the United States is unlikely, Godfrey said.
“We can do more lithium extraction and copper, but there’s likely a bunch of things that are going to stay (overseas),” he said. “The question should be who are we sourcing this from and are we hedged.”
Western alternative
Discussions between European and U.S. officials largely revolve around creating an international alliance to mine and process critical minerals, reducing reliance on China’s existing supply chain. In such a world, lithium could be mined in the United States or Australia and then shipped to Mexico or another ally where environmental laws are not as strict and labor costs cheaper, to be processed and manufactured into batteries — creating a western alternative to China’s existing supply chain.
“Between the EU, the U.S., Canada and Australia, it’s a huge amount of land, and I’m confident all the metals we need can be found,” Murray Hitzman, a geologist at University College Dublin, said at the Securing America’s Future Energy event. “It’s just a matter of political will.”