Advanced Search
October 6, 2025
Key Takeaways:
Critical minerals are embedded in the fabric of everyday life, from energy, communications, and consumer electronics to transportation and healthcare. These minerals are also the foundation of the clean energy transition. Minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and nickel are key inputs for the advanced batteries used in electric vehicles (EVs) and energy storage. Neodymium and dysprosium are essential for the permanent magnets in electric vehicles and wind turbines. Tellurium and cadmium can be found in solar panels, while aluminum is a crucial component of modern transmission lines. Even next-generation fuels like renewable hydrogen rely on platinum, nickel, or iridium.
The United States produces 37 of the 50 critical minerals identified by the U.S. Geological Survey from mining, secondary recovery, or recycling. However, it lacks a strong domestic supply chain, making the country heavily dependent on imports for most of its mineral needs. In 2024, the United States relied on imports for 100% of 12 critical minerals, and for more than 50% of another 28 minerals. China dominates global supply chains, being the top producer of 60% of U.S.-designated critical minerals. China is also the leading source of U.S. imports for nine of the 13 minerals for which the United States is most import-reliant. The United States also relies on Canada, Japan, and South Africa for critical minerals.
As this reliance suggests, a small fraction of countries produce the bulk of global critical mineral supplies. This fact—combined with long timelines for U.S. mining projects, mineral price volatility, and geopolitical conflict—has left the country vulnerable to supply chain disruptions. Finding alternative, domestic sources of critical minerals can reduce vulnerability to these disruptions while supporting the clean energy transition.
One strategy to reduce dependence is to adopt a more circular economy. As opposed to the traditional “take-make-waste” linear model, circular economies emerge when companies reduce material use, redesign products to require fewer inputs, and capture waste as a resource for new production. This approach improves resource efficiency, reduces waste, eases pressure on ecosystems, and lowers greenhouse gas emissions. It also presents opportunities for new markets and job creation by expanding recovery and remanufacturing industries, and by favoring new business models like product leasing and product-as-a-service.
Improving resource efficiency and exploiting domestic sources is particularly important for critical minerals. As demand for clean energy and other critical mineral-reliant technologies increases, the need for minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and manganese is expected to rise. Circular strategies like recycling and secondary recovery can help meet this increased demand through domestic supply, without resorting to mining and its accompanying environmental damage. Reconfiguring the country’s critical mineral supply chain to prioritize circularity could bolster sustainability efforts and build toward a more secure energy future.
Recycling is one of the most important strategies for securing access to critical minerals. Mineral recycling can help reduce import reliance, decrease waste, and limit the environmental impacts of mining and waste disposal. Indeed, as more products containing critical minerals reach the end of their lives, they end up in landfills, potentially harming the environment and disproportionately impacting low-income and Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) communities.
Lithium-ion battery recycling, particularly of EV batteries, presents significant opportunities. Battery recycling could reduce demand for mined lithium, nickel, and cobalt by around 10%. Despite this potential, fewer than 15% of U.S. lithium-ion batteries are recycled due to inefficient and inconsistent collection systems and limited recycling infrastructure.
Currently, most critical mineral recycling takes place through pyrometallurgy and hydrometallurgy. In pyrometallurgy, batteries are smelted at high temperatures to recover metals, whereas in hydrometallurgy, acids are used to leach minerals from the battery’s cathodes, where the critical minerals are found. While both methods are effective, they are also costly and resource-intensive.
However, new techniques are beginning to improve the affordability and sustainability of mineral recycling. Researchers are developing two processes, organic acid extraction and deep eutectic solvents, which increase the efficiency and decrease the environmental impacts of hydrometallurgy. Another more widely adopted innovation is direct recycling, also known as “cathode to cathode” recycling, which restores cathode materials for immediate reuse rather than breaking them down into their base metals.
Battery design is a critical factor in overall recyclability. Complex disassembly is a major obstacle to scaling up recycling. Currently, many EV batteries are built with screws and welds that make dismantling them difficult and time-intensive. To address this challenge, researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory are experimenting with a new Quick-ReleaseTM Binder that could replace conventional fasteners, enabling more cost-effective and efficient disassembly. Designing batteries for recyclability from the start ensures that mineral recovery is viable.
While recycling alone cannot fulfill U.S. demand for critical minerals, it is crucial to securing a domestic supply chain. By recapturing minerals that would otherwise end up in landfills and returning them to circulation, the United States can bolster its supply chain while protecting vulnerable communities.
Secondary Recovery Definition
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L.117–58) defines secondary recovery as “the recovery of critical minerals and metals from discarded end-use products or from waste products produced during the metal refining and manufacturing process, including from mine waste piles, acid mine drainage sludge, or byproducts produced through legacy mining and metallurgy activities.”
While recycling focuses on products already in circulation, secondary recovery targets byproducts, or “tailings”, of critical mineral production, processing, and manufacturing. Historically, this waste has been underutilized due to its environmental and health hazards, but when treated properly, it can be transformed into new, domestic sources of critical minerals.
Acid Mine Drainage
On federal land alone, there are 140,000 abandoned mine features, costing the federal government $287 million in annual remediation. Acid mine drainage (AMD) is one of the most significant issues associated with abandoned mines, contaminating 12,400 miles of streams and rivers in the United States. When mines are abandoned, they leave behind pits that collect rainwater. This water reacts with sulfide minerals from exposed rocks and oxygen to form sulfuric acid, which in turn dissolves heavy metals from the rocks into the water. Once the pit reaches its maximum level, it overflows into the surrounding watershed, contaminating the environment. Contaminated AMD water also contains critical minerals.
New treatment methods can simultaneously clean the water while capturing these minerals. For example, a two-step process developed at Pennsylvania State University adds carbon dioxide to AMD to create solids containing critical minerals that can be separated from the water. In Appalachia, solids collected from AMD treatment have been found to contain over 2,000 milligrams of rare earth elements per kilogram of material, valued at up to $400 per metric ton. The study of a pilot recovery plant by the University of West Virginia confirmed that recovery can be both technically feasible and economically viable at scale, with positive returns and payback within a few years. These high yields have been confirmed for AMD from coal and hard-rock mines, indicating that AMD recovery is applicable to many abandoned mines across the United States.
Phosphate Fertilizer Waste
Another promising opportunity for critical mineral secondary recovery comes from the fertilizer industry. Producing phosphate fertilizer generates large volumes of phosphogypsum waste—about 5 tons for every ton of phosphate produced. This radioactive waste, typically stored in large piles at hazardous waste sites, has high concentrations of critical minerals.
While more experimental than AMD recovery, chemical extraction methods for fertilizer waste have successfully extracted 77–94% of rare earth elements (REEs), a subset of critical minerals, from phosphogypsum. More recent research on biological methods of extraction has found that bio-acids can leach REEs at a milder acidity than mineral acids, reducing potential environmental impacts. Adding special polymers to the fertilizer waste can further concentrate REEs, increasing the ease of extraction. A concentration of only 4% of REEs in the phosphogypsum waste wash—after chemical concentration procedures—is required for recovery.
Researchers are now looking to bring these methods to scale and increase yields. Experts emphasize that recovery becomes most viable when extraction facilities are co-located with existing phosphate operations, where the waste is already being collected and handled. Co-location reduces transportation and infrastructure costs, allowing recovery systems to leverage the fertilizer industry's existing footprint.
Critical minerals are essential to everyday life and the clean energy transition. Worryingly, the United States remains heavily reliant on imports for most of its supply. Circular economic strategies, particularly recycling and secondary recovery, offer practical ways to reduce dependence while simultaneously bolstering economic and environmental opportunities.
In March 2025, President Trump signed an executive order prioritizing the domestic production of critical minerals. The Department of Energy responded with nearly $1 billion in new funding for battery recycling, expanded recovery from mining and metal byproducts, and rare earth recovery and refinement demonstration projects. Congress has shown bipartisan support as well, through the Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act of 2025 (H.R.2444/S.257) and the Intergovernmental Critical Minerals Task Force Act (H.R.3198/S.823).
Even with this growing activity, additional federal support is still needed, including long-term support for recycling infrastructure, expansion of nationwide secondary recovery facilities, and clearer standards for integrating circular economy principles into supply chain planning.
Author: Erin Parker
Advancing science-based climate solutions
Top-Rated Climate Nonprofit – 4-Star Charity