On the 25th, Bloomberg reported that the U.S. Geological Survey, under the U.S. Department of the Interior, released a draft of a new list of critical minerals that day, recommending a total of 54 critical minerals. For the first time, copper was included on the list—thus further paving the way for broader policy support.

　　According to the draft, copper, along with six other minerals—potash, lead, rhenium, silicon, and silver—have been added to the list of critical minerals, while arsenic and tellurium have been removed from the list. In addition, the U.S. Geological Survey indicated that it will consider whether to designate metallurgical coal and uranium—a fuel used in nuclear power plants—as critical minerals. The draft list is now undergoing a 30-day public comment period; following this, the U.S. Department of the Interior will publish the final list.

　　Minerals listed on the U.S. Critical Minerals List will receive financial support from the U.S. government, and projects related to exploration, mining, and refining will also benefit from streamlined approval processes. According to Mining.com, a leading international mining news website, the release of the latest draft of the U.S. Critical Minerals List represents the most significant revision since the list was first introduced in 2018. As required by the U.S. Energy Act of 2020, the Critical Minerals List is updated every three years; the last update took place in 2022. Prior to the release of the new draft list, the U.S. conducted a comprehensive assessment of risks to the supply of relevant mineral resources, covering a total of 84 commodity minerals, 402 industries, and more than 1,200 different scenarios.

　　Acting Director Sarah Lake of the U.S. Geological Survey stated bluntly that the mineral-related industries contributed more than $4 trillion to the U.S. economy last year. The new risk assessment methodology will help authorities precisely identify which industries are most vulnerable to supply-chain disruptions. The agency revealed that copper and silicon were added to the list because their refined-product supply chains face risks of disruption, which could lead to severe economic consequences. Potash was included due to the risk of trade barriers, particularly from its major supplier—Canada. Silver was added to guard against the possibility, though relatively low-probability, of a significant supply disruption originating from Mexico.

　　The United States accounts for 5% of the world’s copper reserves, yet statistics show that U.S. copper production has declined by 20% over the past decade. In 2023, U.S. copper production fell by 11%, and in 2024, it is expected to decline further by another 3%. According to estimates by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2024, about 45% of the U.S.’s annual copper consumption relies on imports. Chile, Canada, Peru, and Mexico are the United States’ primary sources of copper imports. According to ING, the decline in U.S. copper production is linked to the country’s complex and time-consuming permitting procedures. It takes an average of 29 years—from exploration to actual production—to build a new mine in the United States; just obtaining various permits and waiting for their issuance can take anywhere from 7 to 10 years.

　　Copper’s conductive properties make it a critical material in the global electrification process. Juan Ignacio Díaz, Chairman of the International Copper Association, pointed out: “Copper fully meets the definition of a critical mineral: it underpins electrification, national defense, and the development of clean energy, yet its supply chain is facing increasingly severe pressures.”

　　To boost domestic production, the United States currently imposes a 50% tariff on copper-containing products, but exempts unrefined, refined copper from tariffs. Experts analyze that the U.S. faces similar challenges in copper production as it does with steel and aluminum. Lauren Seidel, a chartered financial analyst and economist at ITR Economics, said in an email to the Canadian Investment News Network (INN): “The U.S. does not have the capacity to produce all the copper we need. Although there has been investment in new mining capacity, these facilities will take several years to become operational—meaning that, at least in the short term, U.S. companies will remain dependent on copper imports.” “Moreover, the tariffs will increase the costs for U.S. importers and consumers when purchasing copper and related products, putting downward pressure on potential economic growth.”