Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2024
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1568, I call up the bill (H.R. 8446) to amend the Energy Act of 2020 to include critical materials in the definition of critical mineral, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WESTERMAN. 8446.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 8446, the Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2024.
H.R. 8446 introduced by Representative Ciscomani would amend the Energy Act of 2020 to add critical materials from the Department of Energy Critical Materials List to the United States Geological Survey's critical minerals list.
Currently, each agency uses different metrics when constructing their respective lists.
DOE's methodology for critical material determination is forward- looking. It accounts for international demand scenarios and growth trajectories specifically for energy technologies.
On the other hand, currently USGS' process only uses historic data to determine supply risk to the U.S. economy and national security.
By law, all the minerals on USGS' list are automatically included in DOE's Critical Materials List. H.R. 8446 would enable the process to work in the other direction by placing critical materials on the critical minerals list.
The Critical Mineral Consistency Act is a straightforward solution that enables each agency to retain responsibility for reviewing minerals under their respective purviews while clarifying persistent confusion over critical minerals versus critical materials. As you can see, even speaking about it on the floor, it is easy to get the two confused.
The bill cuts across jurisdictional red tape while preserving each agency's discretion and expertise in adding items to its list.
Both critical minerals and critical materials are just that, critical. Without reliable access to essential materials such as cobalt and lithium for batteries and copper and aluminum for transmission lines, the U.S. risks failing to meet future economic and energy demands. Such a situation would lead to increased dependence on the market decisions of adversarial nations for critical minerals and materials.
H.R. 8446 passed out of the Natural Resources Committee on a bipartisan vote because both sides of the aisle understand the importance of critical minerals and materials.
I encourage my colleagues to once again come together to support this bill.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WESTERMAN. There were a lot of claims made from my friends across the aisle about what this bill does or what its intent and purpose are. I think I need to clarify some of this.
First off, I heard the claim that this bill would cost billions and billions of dollars to the taxpayer. I am not going to ask to submit that for the record because it is already part of the record. It is the CBO score for this bill that says, at most, it is a $2 million cost to administer the program, which actually seems high to me, but it is far from billions of dollars of handouts to anyone. That is what the Congressional Budget Office said. That is what I am repeating here.
Also, a claim was made that we are exporting copper. I include in the Record the link from the U.S. Geological Survey's ``Mineral Commodity Summaries 2024,'' which shows that we import 46 percent of the copper that comes into the country. That is on page 64 of that report. https:/ /pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2024/mcs2024.pdf
Mr. Speaker, it was mentioned about the demand for copper, and I do agree with that. We have an insatiable demand for copper. A lot of that is created by some of the massive spending programs that our friends across the aisle passed a few years ago.
There are estimates that say we need to mine more copper than we have mined in the history of the world in the next 20 to 30 years. There is a big demand for copper, and we are blessed in the United States because we have that copper here that we can use to create jobs, grow our economy, and help national security.
This bill is not about copper, but if we want to talk about copper, I think we have a very strong position on our side of the aisle on how we see copper and how copper can play an important role in the economy going forward.
Also, there was talk about DOE's list and USGS' list. I want to clarify that the critical minerals on USGS' list automatically go into DOE's Critical Materials List. This bill would take DOE's Critical Materials List and make it synonymous with USGS' critical minerals list.
By the way, USGS supports this legislation. You would think if this administration's USGS had a problem with doing that, they wouldn't have supported the bill.
I know there were a lot of claims made, but I think it is important that we get the facts out here in the debate.
Again, we are talking about copper. So let's talk about copper a little bit. This chart shows that in 1995, we produced 2.3 million tons of copper, and China produced 0.7 million tons. That is about three times more copper that we produced in the United States in 1995.
In 2020, China was up to 9.8 million tons a year, and we were at 0.9 million tons. You can see our overall production actually went down; China's skyrocketed. In 2020, they were producing 11 times more copper than we produced here in the United States. It is not because we don't have copper deposits in the United States, it is because people don't want copper mining and production in their backyard. However, if you are building a copper mine, you don't get to choose where the copper is located. It has long ago been determined that the copper in these places, sometimes it is on Federal lands, sometimes it is on private land.
The reason our production has gone down is because we can't permit new copper mines. We also can't permit copper refineries. The other side of this story is we have 2 copper refineries in the United States today and China has over 50.
With estimates that we need to produce more copper going forward in the next couple of decades than has been produced in the history of the world, you can see where that production is going to come from unless we decide to mine the copper in our country, unless we decide to build responsible mines where there aren't human rights violations, where there aren't environmental violations, where we do things better, safer, and more efficient than anyplace else in the world.
Someone who knows how critical these minerals are to our defense and to our way of life here in America is the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to read directly from USGS's testimony on this bill in committee: ``As a possible way to manage the two lists, the USGS supports this bill.''
That is verbatim from their testimony in committee.
Also, we can talk about copper for a long time because it is the poster child of misguided principles and misguided regulations in our country. However, there is more on the list than just copper.
Let's talk about electrical steel. Electrical steel goes into transformers.
Mr. Speaker, if you want to build new transmission lines and transmission systems, then you have to have transformers. You can't build transformers without electrical steel. It is not on the critical minerals list, but it is on the Critical Materials List.
What about fluorine?
Nuclear reactors and electronics depend on fluorine. It is on the Critical Materials List. It is not on the critical minerals list.
Here is a good one: silicon carbide. Congress passed this massive bill to subsidize semiconductor companies to build chips factories here in the United States. Actually it was called the CHIPS bill. We are going to build chips facilities in the United States, but we can't produce the silicon carbide needed to put into those chips facilities.
It is about a lot more than copper, but copper is the big material that is out there that should be obvious to everyone that if we are going to have a more electrified economy, if we are going to build more electronics, and if we are going to have more renewable energy systems and transmission lines, then copper is absolutely critical to it, and that is why there is such a large projected demand for copper.
Fortunately, we actually have copper in the United States.
Also I believe they have platinum and palladium.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WESTERMAN. In closing, I go back to this idea of what mining in America could mean to America. We know that it has national security implications. We know that it has critical implications on being able to grow our energy sector, to grow our economy.
I want to look at just strictly the mining and manufacturing component from mining. I have already submitted this report for the record, page 4, which USGS, along with Commerce, puts out every year. It shows how much material we mine in the U.S., how much we export, and how much we import. The net value last year was $129.7 billion. Of all the ore that we mined and the exports and imports, it was worth $129.7 billion.
That is a lot of wealth, but it pales in comparison to the amount of wealth that is generated when that raw material is converted into a metal. That material was worth $890 billion when it was refined into metal.
When we talk about generating wealth, we are generating income for local communities and American workers not just by mining that ore but by processing it into metal, where we can increase it by eight or nine times the value, which means income for rural Americans.
This same report shows us that $890 billion worth of value created from this material, along with another $102 billion worth of material that we had to import, created an impact on our economy of $3.9 trillion. Think about that.
When we use the resources that we have, it creates jobs in extracting those resources and in processing and refining those resources, and it creates jobs throughout our economy on manufacturing the goods and products that come from those resources.
I don't want it to be lost on anyone that, historically, and this year is no exception, the U.S. Treasury receives about 16.5 percent of the GDP in tax revenue. When we look at budget issues in America, for every trillion dollars we grow our economy, we are creating another $165 billion going to the side of the ledger that we want it to go to, the income side, to help out with our budget.
At the same time, when we are promoting things that create high- paying jobs, we are taking money off of the other side of the ledger through social welfare programs. President Reagan said it best: The greatest social welfare program ever invented was a job.
It is time that we have these jobs in America, using American resources, refining those resources, and manufacturing products from them.
That takes me back to H.R. 8446. Both lists aim to identify vital minerals susceptible to supply shocks. With this bill, each agency will continue to review minerals and materials for redesignation regularly, just as Congress intended.
It was mentioned that there is no science behind this. We are trusting these agencies, USGS and DOE, to go through the same processes they have always gone through, but to put these lists together to have a comprehensive list.
These lists were not meant to be static snapshots of siloed industries. They are meant to be flexible tools that foster collaboration between sectors and agencies to promote the well-being of our ever-changing supply chain.
H.R. 8446 allows each agency the latitude to perform its own independent analysis. For example, DOE's most recent iteration of the Critical Materials List contains copper, electrical steel flooring, silicon, and silicon carbide. USGS' critical mineral list does not contain those. These materials are used in power generation, electrical wiring, semiconductors, solar panels, transformers, defense applications, really all over and all throughout our society.
We must continue to find ways to release China's stranglehold on our critical mineral supply chain. They have exploited their position on multiple occasions by instigating commodity dumping to make U.S. and our allied nations' critical mineral production uneconomical.
H.R. 8446 will provide the Federal Government with a clearer and more holistic snapshot of the materials we need to safeguard our economy, energy, and national security.
Mr. Speaker, I again thank Mr. Ciscomani for all of his work on this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record letters of support from the following organizations: the National Association of Manufacturers, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Mint Innovation, and the Copper Development Association. National Association of Manufacturers, Washington, DC, November 13, 2024. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the National Association of Manufacturers, the largest manufacturing trade association in the United States, representing manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 states, I respectfully urge you to vote ``yes'' on H.R. #8446, the Critical Minerals Consistency Act.
Manufacturers need robust, secure and reliable access to critical minerals and materials (including lithium, cobalt, copper, nickel and silicon) to make innovative products that power modern life, such as computer electronics and cell phones, batteries for storage, solar panels and household appliances. The U.S. has enormous mineral wealth, including some of the world's largest deposits of lithium and copper, and this legislation will help America remain a natural resources superpower.
Under the Energy Act of 2020, Congress directed the Department of the Interior (DOI) to identify and maintain a list of critical minerals to be routinely updated by the U.S. Geological Service (USGC) Unfortunately, the items that appeared on this list did not align with a separate critical materials list that was established under the same law to be maintained by the Department of Energy (DOE). This is causing confusion among producers because eligibility for certain grant programs, tax credits, loan guarantees or improved permitting processes are only granted to items on the DOI list.
This legislation is a priority for manufacturers to shore up supply chains of key minerals and materials by adding copper, electrical steel, silicone and silicone carbide to the national critical minerals list These are materials that are irreplaceable in crucial energy, technology and national security applications from electrical equipment and batteries to grid transformers and semiconductors American manufacturing is too often reliant on foreign sources of raw and refined inputs of these materials, when we can and must be doing more to produce them domestically.
H R. 8446 provides necessary clarity by creating parity between the DOE critical materials list and the DOI critical minerals list and ensures that key minerals to America's national and energy security, like copper, electrical steel and silicone, are not left out.
Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Chris Netram, Managing Vice President, Policy. ____ U.S. Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs, Washington, DC, November 14, 2024.
To the Members of the U.S. House of Representatives: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce strongly supports H.R. #8446, the Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2024, a to streamline interagency operations and eliminate the disparity in benefits available to critical materials and critical minerals by the Federal government The Chamber will consider including votes related to this legislation in our annual How They Voted scorecard.
Currently, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the Department of Energy (DOE) develop separate lists of what qualifies as critical minerals and materials. Critical materials that are only on the DOE list are not eligible for the more extensive benefits granted to the critical minerals listed by the USGS. Reconciling the two lists would lead to expanded access to critical materials like copper, and would simplify and streamline interagency coordination efforts to determine which elements and minerals are critical to U.S. national and economic security.
Rapidly increasing demand for critical minerals coupled with mounting geopolitical instability makes developing a strong, reliable, domestic critical minerals supply chain vital to America's future. Our current attempts to secure the mineral supply chain rely too heavily on foreign sources while slowing or halting completely the ability to expand domestic mining To bolster domestic supply chains and ensure stable long term economic growth, we must invest in, rather than constrain by bureaucracy, the responsible development of our abundant natural resources.
We applaud the work of the House Committee on Natural Resources to develop this legislation and we urge you to vote in favor when this bill comes to the House floor. Sincerely, Rodney Davis, Senior Vice President, Government Affairs, U.S. Chamber of Commerce. ____ Mint Innovation, November 13, 2024. Hon. Bruce Westerman, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, House of Representatives, Washington DC.
Dear Chairman Westerman: On behalf of Mint Innovation, an electronic waste recycling and biotechnology company for metals recovery founded in New Zealand in 2016 with a commercial facility located in Sydney, Australia that will this week announce plans to build its first domestic operation in Longview, Texas, we write to you to endorse H.R. 8446, the Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2024.
Mint Innovation is a clean biotechnology pioneer transforming waste into value to empower a resilient future. Mint's proprietary low-carbon, local and circular solution recovers critical metals and materials from electronic waste, such as printed circuit boards. Mint's technology uses a combination of naturally occurring biomass and smart chemistry to recover high value and critical metals, namely gold and copper.
As we establish a network of domestic facilities here in America, we will also be able to recover Tin and Silver as well as Praseodymium, Neodymium, Terbium, Dysprosium and Tantalum from our byproducts. As we further develop the technology to recycle black mass in lithium-ion batteries, we will add Lithium, Cobalt, Nickel and Graphite to our list of recovered metals. We do this in a low-impact, cost-effective way, strengthening and securing local supply chains.
As national critical mineral security concerns grow and natural reserves dwindle, solutions that recover critical metals close to the source make more sense than ever, and key policies and legislation, such as H.R. 8446, the Critical Minerals Consistency Act of 2024, will allow emerging technologies to break new ground in critical mineral production and electronic waste processing.
We applaud the work of Reps. Ciscomani, Newhouse, Crane, Biggs, Lesko and Curtis for their work to ensure parity between Critical Materials, as defined by the Department of Energy (DOE), and Critical Minerals, as defined by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). Thank you, Jason Price, Chief Operating Officer, Mint Innovation. ____ Copper Development Association Inc., June 11, 2024. Hon. Bruce Westerman, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, House of Representatives, Washington DC.
Dear Chairman Westerman: I write to you on behalf of the Copper Development Association (CDA) to share our strong endorsement and support of HR 8446, the Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2024. CDA is the U.S.-based not-for-profit association of the global copper industry, bringing the value of copper and its alloys to society to solve the challenges of today and tomorrow. We influence the use of copper and copper alloys through research, development, and education, as well as technical and end-user support. We are the voice of the copper industry.
Today, the U.S. copper industry supports more than 395,000 direct, indirect, and induced jobs and more than $160 billion in economic output. The U.S. copper industry is a key national driver contributing mightily to the economic success and national security of the United States. Copper is also referred to as the ``metal of electrification'' because of its high electrical conductivity and use across all energy transition applications including EV batteries and storage, wind energy, solar photovoltaics, transmission and distribution, and other low-carbon energies such as hydrogen.
These characteristics and the projected doubling in demand for copper by 2035 are some of the reasons why the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) added copper to their Critical Materials list last year. While this recognition is certainly welcome, exclusion from the USGS Critical Minerals list has kept copper from being eligible for benefits, include DOE Title 17 financing, FAST-41 permitting support, and others. HR 8446 eliminates this disadvantage by adding copper and other important clean energy materials to the USGS list.
HR 8446 not only has our support, but several bipartisan energy and electrification groups in Washington also favor the legislation. These include:
Zero-Emission Transportation Association (ZETA), National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), Business Council on Sustainable Energy (BCSE), and Transformer Manufacturers Association of America (TMAA).
We are also heartened by the fact that USGS themselves in their written testimony to the House Committee on Natural Resources supports HR 8446 as they wrote ``As a possible way to manage the two lists, the USGS supports this bill.''
Given the support for the legislation by us and others, including USGS themselves, we are hopeful the Committee will vote favorable to support HR 8446. Regards, Adam Estelle, President & CEO.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I also note for the record the support of the following organizations: the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, the National Electrical Manufacturing Association, the Zero Emission Transportation Association, the Transformer Manufacturing Association of America, and the National Mining Association.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source