Frank Fannon of CSIS writes about a potential rare earth supply chain disruption.
- The United States does not include copper on its list of critical minerals but Canada does which could be especially important for trade and production purposes.
- Under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act critical mineral production in Canada is considered “domestic” for tax and incentive purposes.
- Because copper is not considered a critical mineral in the United States producers in Canada may not view trade with the U.S. to be worth their while, which could open up the possibility of nasty trade disputes and undermine clean energy goals.
- The United States should list copper as critical mineral to avoid future trade and production disruptions.
“Consider a situation where a Canadian copper producer sought to benefit from the laws, but would be barred from doing so because of the divergent lists. This could create a significant diplomatic challenge and a nasty trade dispute. Perhaps more importantly, such a challenge would undermine the West’s shared strategy to develop a secure, responsible clean energy supply chain.”
Read the full article here.
The views and opinions expressed are those of the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of C3.
