The Pentagon’s hoarding of critical minerals for military purposes is coming under scrutiny as concerns grow about the impact on the energy transition. Despite Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s dismissal of climate change issues, a new report reveals that the Defense Department is stockpiling critical minerals that could be used to decarbonize key sectors like transportation and energy production.
President Donald J. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act allocated $7.5 billion to bolster the Pentagon’s reserves of critical minerals such as cobalt, lithium, and graphite. These materials are essential for various military applications, from jet engines to weapons systems, and are often sourced from countries like China. The stockpile is only accessible during times of war or by order of the Undersecretary of War.
However, a report by the Transition Security Project highlights the potential peaceful uses of these minerals for the energy transition. For example, the planned cobalt and graphite stockpiles could be used to electrify buses or produce battery capacity to support renewable energy technologies. The International Energy Agency also recognizes the importance of these minerals for green technologies.
The Pentagon’s move to expand its hoard of critical minerals has raised concerns among experts, including some within the military and government. A Department of Defense report from 2021 warned that disruptions in the supply chain for rare earth elements could harm the civilian economy. Critics argue that the focus on military stockpiling may hinder the transition to a green economy.
Lorah Steichen, a strategist with the Transition Security Project, emphasizes the need to prioritize the peaceful uses of critical minerals for the energy transition. She questions the definition of “criticality” and calls for a reevaluation of the materials needed for a sustainable future.
As the US military remains one of the largest institutional emitters of greenhouse gases, there is a growing need for transparency and accountability in its resource procurement practices. Geographer Julie Klinger highlights the importance of public access to information about mineral procurement and usage, especially as taxpayer funds support critical mineral projects.
The Defense Logistics Agency’s disclosure of its efforts to procure cobalt and graphite is a rare instance of transparency. Steichen notes that more transparency is needed to understand the full impact of military stockpiling of critical minerals on the energy transition. The Pentagon’s reliance on rare earth minerals for military equipment like the F-35 warplane has raised concerns about accountability and resource use. It is estimated that a single F-35 warplane requires about 920 pounds of rare earth minerals for its engines and weapons-tracking systems. However, the distribution of these minerals within the Pentagon’s supply chain remains unclear.
According to Steichen, there is a significant accountability gap in understanding where these minerals are going within the military sectors and to different contractors. The Pentagon has been investing in mines in locations such as Alaska, Idaho, and Saudi Arabia to produce some of these critical minerals. Right-wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and Rand have been advocating for the government to stockpile these materials to reduce dependence on countries like China, which currently dominates the global critical minerals market.
Critics like Klinger question the prioritization of military stockpiling of rare earth minerals, particularly because many of these minerals have the potential to be recycled when used in civilian applications like batteries. Unlike fossil fuels, which are consumed through use, critical minerals like lithium and cobalt can be reclaimed or recycled. Klinger raises concerns about the wasteful use of critical minerals in military applications, such as bombs, which essentially destroy these resources.
She emphasizes the importance of considering whether these critical minerals are being used in energy technologies with societal benefits or simply extracted from the ground to be destroyed in warfare. The discussion around the use of rare earth minerals in military equipment highlights the need for a more sustainable approach to resource management and a careful consideration of the long-term implications of their consumption.
