Highlights

• Only 7.6% of federal land mining projects target critical minerals
• Gold dominates 55% of mining projects
• China processes 90% of global rare earth elements, exposing U.S. defense sector to strategic vulnerabilities
• Current policy incentives are insufficient to drive critical mineral production
• More aggressive market interventions are required

The Wake Forest Law & Policy Journal draft reveals a systemic failure to align mining incentives with national security priorities. John C. Ruple, (opens in a new tab) University of Utah Wallace Stegner Center for Land, Resources & the Environment as well as Utah research associate Wesley Peebles (opens in a new tab) conduct a sweeping eight-year analysis testing whether the U.S. mining industry is responding to bipartisan policy efforts aimed at reshoring critical mineral supply chains—scarce earth elements (REEs), lithium, cobalt, and other strategic materials essential for defense systems and clean energy technologies. Using a review of over 400 environmental reviews on federal lands between 2017 and 2024, the authors measure mining activity in terms of NEPA-required Environmental Assessments (EAs), Environmental Impact Statements (EISs), Categorical Exclusions (CEs), and Determinations of NEPA Adequacy (DNAs).

The goal: determine whether federal policy and funding, totaling billions under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Inflation Reduction Act, and multiple Defense Production Act allocations, are translating into real-world critical mineral mining activity.

Damning Verdict

The verdict is damning. Of 209 federal land mining EAs and EISs reviewed, only 16 (7.6%) targeted any of the 50 officially designated critical minerals, and gold was the primary target in over 55% of projects. Categorical Exclusions and DNAs, which might capture early-stage exploration, also showed negligible interest in critical minerals. Lithium was the only vital mineral to receive even moderate industry attention, but even here, U.S. production remains well below global demand forecasts. Despite the Trump and Biden administrations invoking the Defense Production Act and Congress appropriating billions to jump-start production, the mining industry remains structurally disincentivized: price volatility, long lead times, and more attractive gold returns keep critical mineral development sidelined.

Implications

The findings carry severe implications for U.S. rare earth and critical mineral supply chains. China still processes approximately 90% of the global rare earth elements (REEs) and dominates refining for lithium, cobalt, and graphite. Without meaningful domestic mine development—especially for rare earth magnet materials like NdPr, Dy, and Tb—the U.S. defense sector remains vulnerable to supply chain disruptions. The study bluntly concludes that “the mining industry is falling short”. It warns that U.S. policies promoting mine permitting reform, stakeholder consultation, and ESG compliance will not alone shift capital flows unless paired with price guarantees, off-take agreements, or strategic stockpiling to stabilize volatile markets.

REEx Take

This pre-publication legal analysis provides a reality check: despite bipartisan ambition and historic investments, U.S. miners aren’t producing what America needs. The rare earth and critical mineral deficit remains a commercial, economic, and national security crisis, and the current system of passive incentivization has failed. Policymakers and industrial planners must now consider active market interventions, enforceable production targets, and enforceable transparency requirements on mineral outputs if they hope to secure the critical materials backbone of 21st-century industry.