Highlights
- China will dominate critical minerals processing for the next 10-15 years, threatening Western technological independence.
- Urgent government-backed investment is needed to rebalance mineral supply chains, particularly for lithium, graphite, and rare earths.
- The EV transition, AI, renewable energy, and defense sectors are driving critical minerals demand despite potential subsidy changes.
In a March 28, 2025 interview with S&P Global, (opens in a new tab) TechMet CEO Brian Menell issued a blunt warning: the West remains dangerously dependent on China for critical minerals, and urgent action is needed to rebalance supply chains. Menell noted that China will remain dominant in processing key materials like lithium, graphite, rare earths, and manganese for at least the next 10–15 years. He advocated for U.S. tariffs on imported minerals to help domestic producers gain scale and argued that current geopolitical realities demand fast, government-backed industrial build-out—particularly in the name of national security.
Menell emphasized that the new U.S. administration’s aggressive posture and willingness to bypass bureaucratic delays could accelerate mine development and critical minerals investment. He highlighted TechMet’s Ukraine-based Dobra lithium project (opens in a new tab) as a likely component of a U.S.-Ukraine resources agreement, although it remains years from production. Menell dismissed concerns about the U.S. pulling EV subsidies, stating the shift to electric vehicles is “unstoppable,” with or without government incentives, due to entrenched industrial investment. Beyond EVs, he cited AI, renewable energy, and defense as major drivers of future mineral demand.
The facts Menell cites align with market trends—China does dominate critical mineral processing, and U.S. permitting remains a bottleneck. His forecast of imminent shortages in lithium (within 2 years), nickel (3–4 years), and cobalt (5–6 years) reflects consensus industry warnings. However, the claim that the U.S. will “do bigger deals quicker” under the new administration is speculative, and his framing of the EV shift as immune to subsidy rollbacks may understate near-term market volatility. Still, the interview presents a fact-based, high-stakes case for rapid Western investment in mineral independence. What are your thoughts on the matter?
Leave a Reply