Highlights

• Trump's mineral strategy aims to reduce U.S. dependence on China by securing rare earth elements and critical minerals from alternative sources.
• Experts suggest Trump's economic nationalism might inadvertently benefit green tech industries and clean energy supply chains.
• The approach could potentially accelerate domestic mining and processing capabilities despite Trump's open dismissal of climate policies.

---

Esme Stallard of BBC explores (opens in a new tab) how Donald Trump’s focus on securing critical minerals—essential for defense, aerospace, and green technology—could have unintended benefits for the clean energy sector. While Trump has openly dismissed climate policies, including withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and scrapping EV targets, his administration has aggressively pursued rare earths and other critical minerals such as lithium and cobalt from Ukraine, Canada, and Greenland, aligning with efforts to reduce U.S. dependence on China, which currently dominates critical mineral processing.

While Trump’s motivation is economic and strategic, some experts argue that his push for minerals could indirectly support the green transition. With the electric vehicle and battery industries driving demand, even conservative analysts suggest his policies might bolster clean energy manufacturing—intentionally or not.

China’s Stranglehold and the U.S. Race to Catch Up

As we have reported in Rare Earth Exchanges, the U.S. is playing catch-up in the critical minerals sector, as China has long invested in Africa and South America to dominate both mining and processing. China’s grip extends beyond extraction—it processes 90% of global rare earths, giving it enormous economic leverage. Trump’s recent actions are largely a response to China’s control, aiming to build domestic capacity and cut reliance on Beijing.

Experts like MIT’s Christopher Knittel suggest that Trump’s push is more about economic nationalism than environmentalism—but in a “happy coincidence”, it could still help green industries. However, Harvard’s Willy Shih warns that Trump’s administration underestimates the complexity of building domestic mining and processing capabilities, which can take a decade or longer.

Biden’s Green Push vs. Trump’s Raw Material Grab

Under Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), the U.S. poured $493 billion into green energy, focusing on manufacturing solar panels, EVs, and batteries. However, it neglected upstream processes—like mineral extraction and processing—which Trump now prioritizes.

Republicans in mineral-rich red states, such as Georgia’s “Battery Belt”, benefited massively from Biden’s IRA. Now, many GOP senators fear Trump will dismantle IRA subsidies, which could hurt job creation in their own states. Some are lobbying to keep IRA incentives while Trump allows the expansion of domestic mining.

Meanwhile, rumors swirl that Trump may issue a “Critical Minerals Executive Order”, fast-tracking mining permits and investment in U.S. processing plants. This could accelerate mineral independence, but also clash with environmental concerns over mining pollution and Indigenous land rights.

Economic Pragmatism vs. Climate Alarmism

The article frames Trump’s actions through a climate-focused lens, emphasizing that he is “not an environmentalist” and that his policies are a “major blow to climate action.” While this seems factually accurate—Trump openly dismisses climate science—the framing downplays the economic realities driving his mineral policies.

Additionally, the article strongly contrasts Trump with Biden, portraying the latter’s climate-focused IRA as a success while questioning whether Trump’s approach will arrive too late. However, the piece does acknowledge expert opinions suggesting that, regardless of Trump’s intent, his policies could still benefit clean tech industries.

A Climate Irony in Trump’s Strategy

Trump’s mineral strategy is not about climate—it’s about economic and national security. Yet, as experts note and as the BBC reporter elaborates, his push for domestic mining and processing could strengthen the supply chains essential for EVs and renewables. If Trump maintains key IRA incentives, his policies might unintentionally accelerate the green transition—not for ideological reasons, but because it serves U.S. economic interests.