Our Next Energy and Security Crisis?

Oil and natural gas aren’t just fuels. They supply building blocks for pharmaceuticals; plastics in vehicle bodies, athletic helmets and thousands of other products; and complex composites in solar panels and wind turbine blades and nacelles. The USA was importing 65% of its petroleum in 2005, creating serious national security concerns. But thanks to fracking, imports are now 40% and the US exports oil and gas.

Today’s vital raw materials foundation also includes exotic minerals like gallium, germanium, rare earth elements and platinum group metals. For the USA, they are “critical” because they are required in thousands of applications; most of them are “strategic” because they’re not produced in the United States.

They are essential for computers, medical imaging and diagnostic devices, night vision goggles, GPS and communication systems, television display panels, smart phones, jet engines, light-emitting diodes, refinery catalysts and catalytic converters, wind turbines, solar panels, long-life batteries and countless other applications. In 1954, the USA imported 100% of just eight vital minerals; in 1984, only eleven.

Today, in this technology-dominated world, the United States imports up to 100% of 35 critical materials. Twenty of them come 100% from China. Others are sourced from Russia, while some come indirectly from places where child labor, worker safety, human rights and environmental standards are nonexistent.

The situation is untenable and unsustainable. Literally every sector of the US economy, the nation’s defense, energy and employment base, its living standards – all are dependent on sources, supply chains and transportation routes that are vulnerable to disruption under multiple scenarios.

Recognizing this, President Trump recently issued an executive order stating that federal policies would henceforth focus on reducing these vulnerabilities, in part by requiring that government agencies coordinate in publishing an updated analysis of critical nonfuel minerals; ensuring that the private sector have electronic access to up-to-date information on potential US and other alternative sources; and finding safe and environmentally sound ways to find, mine, reprocess and recycle critical minerals – emphasizing sources that are less likely to come from unfriendly nations, less likely to face disruption.

The order also requires that agencies prepare a detailed report on long-term strategies for reducing US reliance on critical minerals, assessing recycling and reprocessing progress, creating accessible maps of potentially mineralized areas, supporting private sector mineral exploration, and streamlining regulatory and permitting processes for finding, producing and processing domestic sources of these minerals.

Incredibly, the last report on critical minerals and availability issues was written in 1973, the year the first mobile telephone call was made. That inexcusable 45 years of neglect by multiple administrations and congresses dates back to the era of “revolutionary” Selectric II typewriters and includes the appearance of desktop computers in 1975 and the first PC in 1981. (That PC had a whopping 16 KB of memory!)

As former geologist, Navy SEAL and military commander – and now Secretary of the Interior – Ryan Zinke has observed, allowing our nation to become so heavily “reliant on foreign nations, including our competitors and adversaries,” for so many strategic minerals “is deeply troubling.”

It’s actually far worse than “troubling” or “neglectful.” It involved a concerted, irresponsible, ill-considered effort to place hundreds of millions of acres in wilderness, wilderness study and other highly restrictive land use categories – often with the very deliberate intention of making their mineral prospects off limits, before anyone could assess the areas’ critical, strategic and other mineral potential.

The 1964 Wilderness Act had originally contemplated the preservation of a few million acres of wild and primitive areas and natural habitats. To ensure informed land use decisions and access to vital mineral resources, Congress included “special provisions” that allowed prospecting and other activities in prospective and designated wilderness areas – and required surveys “on a planned, recurring basis,” by the US Geological Survey, to gather information about mineral or other resources – as long as such activities are carried out “in a manner compatible with the preservation of the wilderness environment.”

Back in 1978, while hiking with him, I asked then Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Rupert Cutler how he could defend ignoring this clear statutory language and prohibiting all prospecting, surveys and other assessment work in wilderness and study areas. “I don’t think Congress should have enacted those provisions,” he replied, “so I’m not going to follow them.” Don’t like the law? Just ignore it.

As of 1994, when geologist Courtland Lee and I prepared a detailed analysis, areas equal to Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming combined were off limits to mineral exploration and development. The situation is far worse today – and because of processes unleashed by plate tectonic, volcanic and other geologic forces, these mountain, desert and other lands contain some of the most highly mineralized rock formations in North America, or even the entire world.

The deck was stacked: for wilderness, and against minerals. This cannot and must not continue.

These areas must surveyed and explored by government agencies and private sector companies. The needs of current and future generations are at stake. Failure to conduct a systematic process violates the most fundamental principles of national defense, national security and responsible government.

The Departments of Agriculture and the Interior should follow the special provisions of the Wilderness Act; abolish, modify or grant exceptions to existing motorized access restrictions; and ensure that areas are evaluated using airborne magnetic and other analytical equipment, assay gear carried in backpacks, truck-mounted and helicopter-borne drilling and coring rigs, and other sophisticated modern technologies.

This approach also complies with environmental and sustainability principles. It ensures that we can get vital strategic minerals from world class deposits on small tracts of land, instead of having to mine and process vast quantities of low quality ores. That protects most wild, scenic and wildlife areas – and modern techniques can then restore affected areas to natural conditions and high quality habitats.

Even ardent environmentalists should support this, because the renewable energy, high-tech future they want and promise depends on these minerals. For example, generating all US electricity (3.5 billion megawatt hours per year) from wind, would require some 14 million 1.8 MW turbines, requiring some 8 billion tons of steel alloys and concrete, 2 million tons of neodymium, and vast quantities of cobalt, rare earth, molybdenum and other minerals. Substituting photovoltaic solar panels for turbines would require arsenic, boron, cadmium, gallium, indium, molybdenum, selenium, silver, tellurium and titanium.

Backing up that electricity for seven windless or sunless days would require 700 million 100kw Tesla battery packs – and thus millions of tons of lithium, cobalt, manganese, nickel and cadmium.

Every generation of renewable energy, computer, communication and other high-tech equipment requires new materials in new quantities – and thus renewed exploration, mining and processing.

The United States is the only country that locks up its strategic mineral resources. No sane, responsible nation risks or forecloses its energy, technology, economic, employment and sustainable future. So it will be fascinating to see which legislators, judges and pressure groups vilify the activities proposed in the Trump executive order, government minerals report and this article.

Those that try to block progress in these areas (along with their financial supporters) should be named and shamed – and their actions made key issues in election campaigns and social responsibility discussions. Perhaps they should be the first to get shut off from electricity, cars, computers, cell phones, medical care, social media and other modern benefits that depend on petroleum and critical minerals

Let the Interior Department know your views on these vital issues. And maybe take a page from the Cutler-illegal immigrants playbook: Become a sanctuary county or state that simply ignores laws, regulations and court dictates – and just launches its own exploration and mining programs.

This is a very well written and informative article that discusses yet another bit of the puzzle on how we make our country less vulnerable to other nations. Many who wish us to fail.

In the 70's we had to "bend the knee" over oil . . . no longer true. Do we repeat this self-enforced error over rare earth elements (and many other things) in the name of being PC or green? I hope not and am glad that any voice of reason has a chance of breaking through to serious discussion under the current administration.

I am so happy that President Trump is providing leadership for our nation. I don’t think we can manage more “business as usual” as bad times are coming and we need to be prepared.

We ship our trash to China to be recycled, including the electronics that contains these rare minerals. It should be pretty easy to be able to keep that trash in the country and recycle it here.

A timely observation.

IIRC, back in the 1930’s we shipped our scrap metal to Japan. Even though that stopped with the outbreak of WWII I recall reading where “our boys spoke of the Chicago El (elevated train tracks) being shot at them.

Now you have to ask yourself, How much of the electronic trash being shipped out (possibly because it is too difficult to comply with environmental laws or lawsuits) that contain some of the very "reclaimable" rare earth elements that the article discusses? Will we one day wake up and realize that "Like the Chicago El" we shipped to a potential enemy the very items we need to keep our economy running?

Good article.

Backing up that electricity for seven windless or sunless days would require 700 million 100kw Tesla battery packs – and thus millions of tons of lithium, cobalt, manganese, nickel and cadmium.

It was FAR EASIER to keep millions of tons of coal around for riding through 90 days of frozen lakes, frozen rivers, or labor strikes. "Green Energy"is a ridiculous hoax just like global warming. Of course, Green Energy itself is driven entirely by the global warming hoax.

Apple currently uses 4% of world cobalt production! It is now entering into direct supply contracts with cobalt mines to secure its supply. The rise of electric cars is consuming much of the world's cobalt supply making availability for industries somewhat tenuous.

back in the 1930’s we shipped our scrap metal to Japan. Even though that stopped with the outbreak of WWII I recall reading where “our boys spoke of the Chicago El (elevated train tracks) being shot at them.

Australian Prime Minister Bob Menzies in that era was known as "Pig-Iron Bob" for his work in facilitating exports of iron to Japan.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.