Methodology and Technical Input for the 2025 U.S. List of Critical Minerals—Assessing the Potential Effects of Mineral Commodity Supply Chain Disruptions on the U.S. Economy
Links
- Document: Report (1.35 MB pdf) , HTML , XML
- Data Release: USGS data release - U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook data for select mineral commodities referenced in “U.S. Geological Survey Methodology and Technical Input for the 2025 U.S. List of Critical Minerals—Assessing the Potential Effects of Mineral Commodity Supply Chain Disruptions on the U.S. Economy”
- Download citation as: RIS | Dublin Core
Abstract
The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, is tasked by section 7002 (“Mineral Security”) of title VII (“Critical Minerals”) of the Energy Act of 2020 (Public Law 116–260, December 27, 2020, 116th Congress) with reviewing and revising the methodology used to evaluate mineral commodity supply risk and the U.S. List of Critical Minerals (LCM) no less than every 3 years. Following two previous LCM assessments, this analysis represents the latest technical input for evaluating each mineral commodity’s supply risk and determining their recommended status on the LCM. We evaluated mineral commodity supply risk using two criteria: (1) an economic effects assessment that quantified the potential effects of various trade disruption scenarios on the U.S. economy, and (2) an examination of whether the mineral commodity’s U.S. supply chain relied on a sole domestic producer that represented a single point of failure. For the first criterion, postdisruption equilibrium quantities and prices for each mineral commodity were calculated based on their price elasticities of supply and demand and the availability of excess production capacity for each yearlong foreign trade disruption scenario. Subsequently, a nonlinear optimization routine was used with detailed economic input-output tables to estimate the potential economic effects on the U.S. economy of over 1,200 scenarios for 84 mineral commodities. After accounting for the probability of each scenario’s occurrence, the overall results are presented in terms of changes in U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) by individual industry and the economy overall. The results, which ranged from a net decrease in U.S. GDP of nearly $4.5 billion to a net increase of $33 million, largely reflect U.S. import dependency and world production concentration. Using the Jenks natural breaks optimization method, a statistical classification technique, we categorized the mineral commodities into several classes based on this overall risk quantification. Mineral commodities with annualized probability-weighted net decreases in U.S. GDP greater than $2 million were recommended for inclusion on the LCM. If a mineral commodity did not meet the threshold for inclusion on the LCM under the first criterion, its domestic supply chain was examined under the second criterion, which recommended a mineral commodity for inclusion on the LCM if there was only a single domestic producer. Ultimately, the two criteria resulted in the recommendation of the addition of six mineral commodities (in descending risk order, potash, silicon, copper, silver, rhenium, and lead) to and the removal of two mineral commodities (arsenic and tellurium) from the LCM. By using an economic effects assessment, the results of this analysis provide a prioritization that can also be compared directly against other risk analyses and the cost of various risk mitigation strategies.
Plain Language Summary
To quantify the risks associated with potential disruptions and to recommend mineral commodities for inclusion on the updated U.S. List of Critical Minerals, as required by the Energy Act of 2020, the U.S. Geological Survey developed an economic model to estimate the potential effects of foreign trade disruptions of mineral commodities on the U.S. economy. The results of the study recommend the addition of six mineral commodities (in descending risk order, potash, silicon, copper, silver, rhenium, and lead) to and the removal of two mineral commodities (arsenic and tellurium) from the List of Critical Minerals. The analysis also provides a prioritization based on the results. The economic model has several advantages over previous assessments including the ability to directly compare the results against other economic risks and the costs of initiatives aimed at reducing the risks.
Suggested Citation
Nassar, N.T., Pineault, D., Allen, S.M., McCaffrey, D.M., Padilla, A.J., Brainard, J.L., Bayani, M., Shojaeddini, E., Ryter, J.W., Lincoln, S., and Alonso, E., 2025, Methodology and technical input for the 2025 U.S. List of Critical Minerals—Assessing the potential effects of mineral commodity supply chain disruptions on the U.S. economy: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2025–1047, 32 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20251047.
ISSN: 2331-1258 (online)
Table of Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Abstract
- Plain Language Summary
- Introduction
- Methods
- Results and Discussion
- Conclusions
- References Cited
| Publication type | Report |
|---|---|
| Publication Subtype | USGS Numbered Series |
| Title | Methodology and technical input for the 2025 U.S. List of Critical Minerals—Assessing the potential effects of mineral commodity supply chain disruptions on the U.S. economy |
| Series title | Open-File Report |
| Series number | 2025-1047 |
| DOI | 10.3133/ofr20251047 |
| Publication Date | August 25, 2025 |
| Year Published | 2025 |
| Language | English |
| Publisher | U.S. Geological Survey |
| Publisher location | Reston, VA |
| Contributing office(s) | National Minerals Information Center |
| Description | Report: vi, 32 p.; Data Release |
| Online Only (Y/N) | Y |
| Additional Online Files (Y/N) | N |