Greenland’s Critical Minerals: Promise or Pipe Dream? A Hard-Hitting Look at Geopolitics, Geology, and Global Supply Chains

Highlights

• Greenland possesses significant rare earth element deposits.
• Faces significant challenges in:
  • Infrastructure
  • Economic viability
  • Regulatory consistency
• Geopolitical tensions arise from potential Chinese investment.
• Western powers show minimal engagement in the region’s mineral development.
• Successful mineral extraction requires comprehensive strategies beyond mining, including:
  • Midstream processing
  • Downstream manufacturing capabilities

---

Greenland has returned to headlines as a potential linchpin in the West’s scramble to secure critical minerals, especially rare earth elements (REEs). A recent article by Flemming Getreuer Christiansen, a seasoned geologist with deep experience in Arctic mining, asks whether geopolitics can unlock Greenland’s mineral treasure chest. At Rare Earth Exchanges, we applaud the spotlight on Greenland’s vast geological endowment—but critically examine whether the assumptions hold up to scrutiny and whether the REE sector, as framed, grasps the full spectrum of upstream, midstream, and downstream requirements.

The piece published in IEEE Spectrum (opens in a new tab) involves a handful of takeaways.  

First, the article highlights Greenland’s significant geological potential, with at least 10 notable rare earth element (REE) deposits—including Kvanefjeld and Kringlerne—and the EU identifying it as prospective for 25 of its 34 listed critical raw materials. However, the island’s harsh terrain, icy conditions, and poor transport infrastructure pose significant challenges to resource access. Political risk also looms large, as a recent ban on uranium co-extraction halted the Kvanefjeld project and triggered legal disputes. Despite Greenland’s strategic relevance, U.S. engagement has been minimal, with only 10 American firms ever holding licenses and none progressing to exploitation. Finally, Greenland’s openness to Chinese investment has sparked geopolitical concerns in Washington and Brussels over potential dual-use infrastructure

Rare Earth Exchanges (REEx) Investor Realism

While the article is well-researched and sharply written, REEx identifies three critical weaknesses in the assumptions underpinning its optimism.

Critical Gaps in the POV	Summary
The Upstream Tunnel Vision	Greenland’s flagship REE deposits do not meet the grade or logistical competitiveness. Kvanefjeld: ~1.4% REE with high thorium/uranium—politically toxic under current laws.Kringlerne: ~0.38% REE—economically marginal and poorly characterized. The cost of establishing open-pit mines with massive energy demands for low-grade rock is rarely acknowledged by the market. Even with favorable geology, Greenland may not beat established projects in Australia, the U.S., or Brazil unless deeply subsidized or vertically integrated.
Economic Viability Is Heavily Overstated	Greenland’s flagship REE deposits do not meet the grade or logistical competitiveness. Kvanefjeld: ~1.4% REE with high thorium/uranium—politically toxic under current laws.Kringlerne: ~0.38% REE—economically marginal and poorly characterized. The cost of establishing open-pit mines with massive energy demands for low-grade rock is rarely acknowledged by the market. Even with favorable geology, Greenland may not beat established projects in Australia, the U.S., or Brazil unless deeply subsidized or vertically integrated.
Investment Climate Remains Frosty	Greenland’s flagship REE deposits do not meet the global peers ‘ grade or logistical competitiveness. Kvanefjeld: ~1.4% REE with high thorium/uranium—politically toxic under current laws. Kringlerne: ~0.38% REE—economically marginal and poorly characterized. The cosmarket rarely acknowledges the cost of establishing open-pit mines with massive energy demands for low-grade rock. Even with favorable geology, Greenland may not beat established projects in Australia, the U.S., or Brazil unless deeply subsidized or vertically integrated.

Geopolitics: Double-Edged Sword

Greenland’s openness to Chinese capital—while understandable given its economic ambitions—could backfire. The article notes that a Chinese-funded REE mine with port, airstrip, and road access could double as a strategic outpost. The United States and its allies would never allow such a scenario to unfold without severe diplomatic consequences. However, neither the U.S. nor the EU has yet stepped up with robust counteroffers: infrastructure, export credit, or industrial partnerships remain vague.

Caution for Investors, Strategy for Policymakers

Greenland has geological potential but lacks infrastructure, midstream capacity, and investor confidence. Without substantial Western investment—not only in exploration but in refining, processing, and end-use industries—the REE dream risks becoming yet another speculative cycle built on stock spikes and shallow drilling programs.

REEx urges policymakers to consider the following:

• Support U.S.-Greenland-EU partnerships for co-investment in midstream facilities in Europe or North America.
• Provide sovereign loan guarantees for strategic projects, similar to the EXIM Bank and DFC programs.
• Coordinate security policy with Denmark and Greenland to ensure long-term access without military overreach.

We urge investors to look beyond the headlines—grade, infrastructure, and regulatory consistency matter more than geopolitical buzzwords.