Rising US Mining Without Adequate Oversight Endangers Frontline Communities

On March 20, 2025, an executive order issued by President Trump aims to boost American mineral production by allocating public funds to mining projects on public lands. This executive order, titled Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production, prioritizes certain minerals deemed “critical,” providing loans, grants, and tax credits specifically for projects related to these critical minerals. The updated Critical Minerals List by the United States Geological Survey, which is revisited every three years, includes minerals like lithium, cobalt, and nickel crucial for renewable energy and defense technologies.

However, the executive order expands the list of critical minerals to include gold, uranium, potash, copper, and some forms of coal. These additions raise concerns as they deviate from the Energy Act of 2020, which excludes “fuel minerals” like uranium and coal, and data indicating low potential for supply chain disruptions for minerals like potash and copper, with significant copper consumption being sourced from recycled scrap. Gold, predominantly used for jewelry, is not considered critical for national security or technological advancements.

Despite claims of expedited mine permitting processes being necessary, data shows that mine permitting times are comparable to other mining nations like Canada and Australia. Delays primarily result from inadequate information provided by mining companies rather than bureaucratic inefficiencies. The executive order mandates several agencies involved in permitting mineral production to prioritize projects that have already submitted applications. It also directs the Interior and Agriculture Secretaries to prioritize mineral production on public lands with known resources, potentially impacting iconic landscapes like the Grand Canyon and the Ruby Mountains.

Furthermore, the executive order intends to weaken the 1872 Mining Law and provide funding from the Export-Import Bank and the State Department’s Development Finance Corporation for mining projects using Defense Production Act funds. This new directive presents concerns as it gives less oversight to financially and environmentally risky mining projects while allowing public funds to support companies that may not disclose critical information to investors.

The executive order’s premise that domestic over-regulation has led to increased reliance on foreign mineral production is questionable, as globalization has been a significant factor influencing mineral processing trends. By expanding the list of critical minerals, expediting mine permitting processes, and reducing oversight on mining projects, the executive order may potentially place frontline communities and their environments at further risk.