Engaging Energy

In recent years the terms Critical Minerals, Strategic Minerals and even Vital Minerals have been coined and presumably coin has been turned on their basis.

These divisions have resulted in endless lists and explanations of which minerals are which, who thinks so and why. Indeed I was been party to this in the early days, however you know things have got silly when an article arrives that lists every element as critical and only excepts two. If it were written ironically I would let it pass.

What must be recognised is that ‘criticality’ is completely relative. It depends on the technology, who you are in the technology cycle and where (geographically and economically) you are speaking from. In fact as I argued in a short note to the UK’s Energy Research Council Network just before Parliament took representations from our learned societies on this topic, what you define as critical defines you.

Maybe these terms have use in policy-making circles, but having spoken to academics and NGOs on the topic I don’t think that’s true. They are generally more confused by the use of these terms than they were before. They can cope with specifics. They are not dumb.

We, in the mining industry, should not be complicit in confusing investors or legislators by wanton rebranding with meaningless jargon. It is difficult enough to persuade the non-mining world that mines are a necessary evil without obsfucation.

This trend appears to have started with the USA pre-occupation with energy independence and its false hope of controlling all elements of its energy cycle. It is a false hope because energy is global cycle not a national one. The separation of supply chains using national security as justification is the basest form of resource nationalism and not one becoming of the world’s biggest economy. It is not surprising that China reacts to this kind of posturing with a robust economic response. It knows that any comment from the WTO on this topic is bluster, at best.

Mining is an exercise in coping with living on a planet whose resources are not distributed evenly. Always has been. Always will be. The sudden realisation, from outside the industry, that the technological world would grind to a halt for the want of a iron nail should not deflect us from providing that nail and millions like it every day.

There is virtually no industrial metals mining left in the USA and those of us who operate outside that dysfunctional legislature should not be drawn into its often bizarre internal politics. Let us concentrate on supplying those nails at the best possible price and let the US increase its own transaction costs to the point where it has no industry left. Then maybe we can call a metal a metal.

PS. the two elements omitted from the ridiculous ‘critical’ list – iron & aluminium, the two most used metals in society today.