Comparing methods for criticality and security in minerals for clean energy

Abstract

Global policy discussions have shifted towards clean energy economies, placing more emphasis on critical minerals and their supply chain security. Critical minerals typically have few substitutes, are essential to a modern technology, and susceptible to short- and long-term supply chain risks. Clean energy technologies require critical minerals for manufacturing, which presents a need for more dynamic considerations to identify risks in shorter timeframes. This paper reviews two methodologies employed for critical mineral identification from nations committed to clean energy transitions. Since the United States and the United Kingdom have committed to increasing their penetration of renewable energy technologies, critical minerals are of high importance, therefore the US National Science and Technology Council (2016), and the British Geological Survey (2015) methodologies are applied to critical minerals prioritized by the US and the UK. Comparing the results of the methodologies identified challenges with timescale applications, which could be problematic when identifying a flexible methodology that meets the needs of rapidly evolving clean energy economies. Other key findings include: applying a weighting across methodologies would allow for more robust comparisons between countries, rather than focusing on supply and market availability; and a broader methodology review could lead to greater transparency, data accessibility, and compatibility of clean energy strategies between nations and regions for energy security. Additionally, existing gaps in the literature are identified, along with suggestions for further work.