The United States is pulling ahead of Europe in securing critical mineral supplies outside China, according to an industry group representing European producers. Washington has moved faster on deals and investment, while the EU's slower process and local opposition to new mines keep it trailing.
The United States is forging ahead in securing non-Chinese sources of critical minerals, while the European Union's centralized approach is falling further behind. Bernd Schaefer, head of a Europe-wide organization representing critical minerals companies, told the Financial Times that EU authorities in Brussels have been too slow to act.
Industry group says Brussels is losing ground
Schaefer said he admires how quickly Americans act on an idea, contrasting that with the EU's approach: According to the Financial Times: "we Europeans hesitate, over-administrate, talk and lose time". Brussels views the comparison differently, arguing instead that Washington has pursued its own critical minerals interests without regard for EU interests in the same area.
An advisor on critical mineral projects in Europe told the Financial Times that regardless of how the Trump administration's approach is judged, it has produced more deals in 18 months than Europe managed in the past decade. The U.S. has directed money toward both domestic production and processing technology, as well as supply contracts with other countries, notably in Latin America.
Permitting delays and local opposition slow EU projects
The EU has tried to speed up its own supply chain by designating select mining, processing, and recycling projects as strategic so they can be fast-tracked for permits. Even under fast-track rules, new mining projects can take up to a decade to reach commercial production, and it would be naive to expect the EU's green lobby to accept new mining without opposition.
The EU has designated the Serbian Jadar lithium project as critical even though Serbia is not an EU member, but local communities are opposing the mine publicly. The U.S. faces its own domestic friction too: NASA has opposed a tungsten project because its location would interfere with the agency's satellite-tracking activities.
Brazil deal shows the gap in dealmaking speed
While the EU worked on methane emissions and packaging regulations, the U.S. kept closing supply agreements abroad. When Washington put money on the table for a critical minerals project in Brazil, the EU was dropped from the shortlist and lost the deal. The episode underscores why Brussels would need to move faster to close the gap with Washington.
Source: Oilprice.com
Trading involves risk.
Risk Disclaimer
