In the wake of a rapidly evolving realignment of the world trading system
resulting from the
economic equivalent of World War III, President Joe Biden last week
took the first of what are likely to be many steps toward building greater
self-sufficiency for the United States.
Biden called for increasing
U.S. production of key minerals used in the manufacture of electric
vehicle batteries. He invoked the Defense
Production Act which allows the government to support production of
certain materials and goods deemed essential for national defense and even
to order industry to mine minerals and make machinery including vehicles
such as tanks and bombs.
For the Biden administration its first small step toward U.S. self-sufficiency consists of making companies
which mine minerals key to electric vehicle batteries such as lithium,
nickel, graphite, cobalt and manganese eligible for direct subsidies or
purchase commitments to incentivize increased production. The applicable
program (called Title III) has about $750 million to spend, not that much
to rectify what is a huge deficit.
It's worth looking at U.S. net imports of each of these minerals to
understand just how hard reaching self-sufficiency will be. For starters,
let's examine a table from a U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) report about U.S. import dependence for key
minerals:
Click the image to enlarge.
Of the five minerals listed above, the United States is 100 percent
dependent on imports for two: graphite and manganese. (It's worth noting
that China,
Russia and Ukraine are among the top six producers of graphite and
China is the largest producer by far. China
and Ukraine are among the top five producers of manganese and again
China is by far the biggest producer.)
Complete U.S. dependence on imports implies that there is no current
production of these minerals in the United States and that nobody has even
been looking for these minerals on U.S. soil. In a
2022 report the USGS confirms that "[g]raphite has not been produced
in the U.S. since the 1950s." This 2017
USGS report shows U.S. reserves of manganese to be exactly zero.
Again, this almost certainly means that there is no mining production
unless the USGS missed something.
(There are known deposits of "nodules" containing significant amounts of
manganese distributed on the world's seabeds. However, there is no
commercially available technology for mining these and their future as a
source of manganese remains uncertain. Moreover, they involve exploiting
minerals that are not exactly on U.S. soil though they may in some cases
be found in what is called the United States' "Exclusive
Economic Zone" extending out into the high seas.)
As a consequence of all this, it is unlikely that subsidies can help
increase production before the end of the decade, if ever. This is because
a mining company would first have to find commercial deposits of
these minerals before beginning to delineate their scope, raise money for
their development and then actually build the mine. This assumes, of
course, that someone will also build sufficient industrial infrastructure
to process these ores into something usable for the industries that need
these minerals and the government that has promised to buy them. (For the
technically minded, here is a
short summary of the obstacles facing such processors regarding
manganese.)
At best it would take several years for all this to happen. And, the
mining company would be taking a risk that subsidies or purchase
commitments might not be renewed since the development time could span two
or more administrations. It is possible, of course, that no commercially
attractive deposits would be found and efforts to restart graphite and
manganese production in the United States would fail.
For cobalt the obstacles are similar though the United States produces
some of the cobalt it uses, about 24 percent. There are known
deposits of cobalt in the United States. Whether they are
commercially viable would have to be determined. Most of the other
difficulties that apply to graphite and manganese would also apply to
cobalt.
The United States imports about half the nickel it uses and only 25
percent of the lithium it needs. These are better candidates for
government incentives since there is active infrastructure, and mining of the existing
and substantial commercially viable deposits could likely be expanded. One
of the main questions here will be the environmental consequences. Environmentalists
are concerned that companies will use the government's desire to develop
more domestic production to ignore environmental regulations.
The development of additional capacity could still take years to bring to
fruition. There is no quick way to develop mines and the infrastructure
around them short of a complete government takeover that requires no
private investment and ignores costs and possibly safety and environmental requirements.
And, that brings us to one of the major obstacles to national
self-sufficiency. We have created a system that is based almost
exclusively on private economic actors who must convince private investors
to plow money into any mining project. And, the market for minerals is
generally worldwide so world prices govern which deposits will be viable.
That means that high-cost domestic deposits are never developed or, if
developed, fail miserably when prices fall. The
sad story of the rare earths Mountain Pass mine in California is
instructive. This high-cost problem would imply that national
self-sufficiency (or least reduced dependence on imports) would require
ongoing price supports for the domestically mined minerals we deem most
critical. No one is talking about that, and I doubt they ever will because
it runs counter to the free-market laissez-faire ideology of those
currently in charge of the world economy. And these leaders cannot yet
fully imagine a world where de-globalization continues far into the
future.
|
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Kurt Cobb is a freelance writer and communications consultant who writes frequently about energy and environment. His work has appeared in The Christian Science Monitor, Resilience, Common Dreams, Naked Capitalism, Le Monde Diplomatique, Oilprice.com, OilVoice, TalkMarkets, Investing.com, Business Insider and many other places. He is the author of an oil-themed novel entitled Prelude and has a widely followed blog called Resource Insights. Point of contact: kurtcobb2001@yahoo.com.
|
![[groups_small]](groups_small.gif)