In an era defined by the push toward clean energy, electrification, and advanced technologies, critical minerals have emerged as the backbone of modern manufacturing and national security. These essential resources—ranging from lithium for batteries to rare earth elements for magnets—are vital for everything from electric vehicles (EVs) to renewable energy infrastructure and defense systems.
However, the United States faces significant vulnerabilities in its supply chains, with heavy reliance on foreign sources, particularly China, which dominates global production and refining. As of October 2025, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has released a draft list of 54 critical minerals, expanding from the 2022 list of 50 by adding commodities like copper, silicon, potash, silver, rhenium, and lead while removing arsenic and tellurium.
This article examines the top 15 critical minerals most relevant to the U.S. energy transition and manufacturing, their global sources, refining capacities, and production of usable materials. It also assesses China’s control, U.S. progress in securing supplies, and the path to independence.
Why Critical Minerals Matter
Critical minerals are defined by their economic importance and high risk of supply disruptions, as per the Energy Act of 2020, which mandates USGS updates every three years.
For the energy sector, minerals like lithium, cobalt, nickel, graphite, and rare earth elements are indispensable for batteries, wind turbines, and solar panels. The International Energy Agency (IEA) highlights that demand for these could quadruple by 2040 under net-zero scenarios, driven by the global shift to clean energy.
Yet, concentrated supply chains pose risks: geopolitical tensions, export restrictions, and environmental challenges can lead to price volatility and shortages. China’s dominance in processing—often exceeding 70-90% for key minerals—amplifies these concerns, especially amid recent export curbs on rare earth technologies and elements like gallium and germanium.
Top 15 Critical Minerals: Sources, Refining, and Usable MaterialsBased on USGS and Department of Energy (DOE) assessments, as well as IEA reports, the following table summarizes the top 15 critical minerals prioritized for the U.S. energy transition. Selection focuses on those with high import reliance, supply risks, and relevance to clean tech. Data includes primary global sources (mining), refining capacity shares, and processes for creating usable materials (e.g., metals, compounds, or alloys for manufacturing). China’s control is quantified where possible, alongside U.S. domestic or secured shares.
Mineral
Key Uses in Manufacturing
Primary Sources (Mining)
Refining Capacity (Global Shares)
Creation of Usable Materials
China’s Control (%)
U.S. Secured/Share (%)
Lithium
EV batteries, energy storage
Australia (50%), Chile (30%), China (10%)
China (60-70%), Australia/Chile (20-30%)
Extracted as brine/carbonate, refined to hydroxide/carbonate for cathodes
60-70% refining
~5% domestic (Nevada projects); imports 100% net reliance
Cobalt
Battery cathodes, alloys
DRC (70%), Australia (5%), Indonesia (5%)
China (70%), Finland/Belgium (15-20%)
Refined to sulfate/metal for battery precursors
70% refining
<5% domestic; ~20% via allies (e.g., Australia)
Nickel
Battery cathodes, stainless steel
Indonesia (50%), Philippines (15%), Russia (10%)
China (35-40%), Indonesia (20-25%)
Smelted to matte/sulfate for NMC batteries
35-40% refining
~10% domestic; high import from Canada/Indonesia
Graphite
Battery anodes, lubricants
China (80%), Brazil/Mozambique (10%)
China (90%), synthetic from U.S./Europe (5-10%)
Processed to spherical graphite for anodes
80-90% mining/processing
0% domestic mining; 100% import reliance
Rare Earth Elements (group)
Magnets for EVs/wind turbines, electronics
China (60%), Australia (15%), Myanmar (10%)
China (90%), Malaysia/Australia (5-10%)
Separated into oxides/metals for neodymium magnets
60% mining, 90% processing
~5% domestic (Mountain Pass); ~15% via allies
Copper
Wiring, motors, renewables
Chile (30%), Peru (10%), China (10%)
China (40%), Chile/Japan (20-25%)
Smelted to cathodes for wire/foil
40% refining
~15% domestic; net exporter of ore but importer of refined
Manganese
Battery cathodes, steel
South Africa (35%), Gabon (20%), Australia (15%)
China (80%), South Africa (10%)
Ferromanganese alloys for steel/batteries
80% processing
0% domestic; 100% import
Gallium
Semiconductors, LEDs
China (95%), Germany/Japan (minimal)
China (95%)
Refined from bauxite to arsenide for chips
95% production
0% domestic; 100% import
Germanium
Fiber optics, solar cells
China (60%), Russia (20%)
China (80%)
Refined to dioxide for optics/semiconductors
80% processing
Minimal domestic; high reliance
brookings.edu
Indium
Solar panels, screens
China (50%), South Korea (20%)
China (60%)
Refined to oxide for ITO coatings
60% processing
0% domestic
crossdockinsights.com
Tantalum
Capacitors, alloys
DRC/Rwanda (50%), Brazil (20%)
China (40%), Estonia/Germany (30%)
Refined to powder for electronics
40% processing
Minimal; recycling efforts
crossdockinsights.com
Tungsten
Alloys, electronics
China (80%), Vietnam (5%)
China (85%)
Refined to carbide for tools
85% production
~10% domestic
brookings.edu
Antimony
Flame retardants, batteries
China (55%), Russia (20%)
China (80%)
Refined to trioxide for alloys
80% processing
Minimal
atlanticcouncil.org
Bismuth
Alloys, pharmaceuticals
China (70%), Mexico (10%)
China (80%)
Refined for low-melt alloys
80% production
Low domestic
brookings.edu
Fluorspar
Steel, aluminum, chemicals
China (50%), Mexico (20%)
China (60%)
Acid-grade for HF in manufacturing
60% processing
~20% domestic
crossdockinsights.com
Sources: Compiled from USGS, IEA, and DOE data.
China’s overall dominance stems from strategic investments since the 1980s, controlling 60% of rare earth mining and up to 95% for gallium, often through state-backed firms.
The U.S. relies on imports for over 50% of 43 critical minerals, with 100% net reliance on 12, including graphite and gallium.
“This mine is one that could basically drive civilization over the next 20, 30, 50 years,” Christopher Messina, CEO of Tanbreez, told me in a recent interview. For the United States and its needs, that is probably no exaggeration given that the resource was recently ranked by Mining.com as #1 on its list of Top 10 rare earth mining projects in the world. The total estimated recoverable resource at Tanbreez of 28.2 Mt. compares to the combined resource in the #4 through #8 mines on the list.
It is an enormous potential resource, on an island nation adjacent to the North American coastline. It can be recovered with current technology with minimal environmental disturbance, and Greenland’s own government is in favor of moving ahead.
It is no accident that the Trump government moved in recent weeks to try to secure a 50% equity interest in that very mine. Indeed, the mine’s existence was the main reason why President Trump spent so much time talking about his desire to purchase the island entirely in the early weeks of his administration.
China’s Control and U.S. Security Measures
China controls an average of 60-80% of global refining for these minerals, leveraging low costs, subsidies, and vertical integration.
Recent actions, such as export restrictions on rare earth technologies (December 2023) and expansions in October 2025 to include five more elements, signal weaponization amid U.S.-China tensions.
This has prompted U.S. responses: The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) offers tax credits for domestic sourcing, while DOE has invested $60 million in magnet manufacturing and critical materials accelerators.
Executive orders in 2025 mandate immediate increases in domestic production, and initiatives like the Minerals Security Partnership ally with Australia, Canada, and others.
Progress includes new facilities for rare earths in California and lithium in Nevada, but domestic refining remains under 10% for most minerals.
Path to Independence: What Needs to Change and How Fast It Can Happen
Achieving full independence from China is challenging due to geological limits, environmental regulations, and capital needs, but resilience through diversification is feasible. Key changes include:
Streamline Permitting: Reduce mine approval times from 10+ years via reforms like FAST-41 for copper and rare earth projects.
Boost Domestic Refining: Federal initiatives like the Critical Mineral Processing Initiative aim to expand U.S. capacity, targeting 25-50% for key minerals by 2030.
International Partnerships: Invest in allied sources (e.g., Ukraine, Central Asia) and recycling to cut reliance by 20-30%.
R&D and Recycling: Advance alternatives and urban mining to recover 10-20% of needs.
Timeline: Partial resilience (reducing China reliance to <50%) could occur by 2030 for lithium and nickel via IRA-driven projects, but full independence for rare earths and graphite may take 10-15 years, per DOE and Atlantic Council analyses.
Urgent action is needed to avoid disruptions in the energy addition and keep the overall economy moving forward. Since much of this is used in military equipment, the wartime powers act typically comes into effect, and the US invests in mining and companies. We will be watching for investment opportunities.
China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in a phone call with his US counterpart Antony Blinken that the US is infringing on free trade rules by imposing export curbs on China, In a read-out of […]
China is due to host representatives of 130 countries for a forum on its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that is likely to be overshadowed by the Israel-Gaza war, and the continuing conflict in Ukraine. […]
ENB Pub Note: This is an excellent article from The Hill. I have been discussing this problem for years, and it is finally coming to light. In the short term, everyone needs to take normal […]
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
Be the first to comment