Journal of Science Policy & Governance
​Volume 22, Issue 01 | March 6, 2023

 Policy Memo: End-to-End Lifecycle Considerations for Minerals Powering Critical Technologies 

Angela Cleri, Ryan Spangler, Emilee Fortier
  1. The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University Park, PA
​
Corresponding author: [email protected] ​
Keywords: critical minerals; critical technology; metal mining; circular economy; clean energy transition; industrialization; sustainability ​​
https://doi.org/10.38126/JSPG220106 ​

Executive Summary

The United States (U.S.) is poised for a new wave of industrialization as it prepares to scale up domestic semiconductor manufacturing and widely implement clean energy infrastructure. With widespread application spaces beyond clean energy, such as communication, computing, healthcare, national security, and transportation, the scope of these endeavors is expected to be massive and long-term. The success of these initiatives is highly dependent on the non-renewable minerals used in critical technologies necessitating the adaptation of current business and legislative models to accommodate future long-term extraction and implementation needs. Without these adaptations, advancements will likely be made at the expense of taxpayers, vulnerable communities, and ecological preservation efforts. We propose policy recommendations to the U.S. federal government to minimize environmental and socio-economic harm resulting from metal mining and promote integration of circular economy principles in electronic product design. These recommendations are expected to have both domestic and international impacts in reducing harmful waste and increasing product longevity. Furthermore, these recommendations align with ensuring long-term U.S. leadership in the semiconductor and clean energy industries. 

-Read the full article through download.-

Background header image courtesy of Geometrics
Angela Cleri is a Materials Science and Engineering Ph.D. candidate at Penn State University. Her thesis research focuses on fabricating high mobility thin film oxide materials for nanophotonic applications. She is the President of the Science Policy Society at Penn State, which she uses as a platform to pursue and share her passions for advocacy, science communication, and community building. 
​
Ryan Spangler is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at The Pennsylvania State University and a member of the on-campus Science Policy Society. His research includes thin film synthesis and nanophotonics with a special focus in enhancing energy transport in microelectronics. 

Emilee Fortier is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at The Pennsylvania State University researching PLD synthesis and characterization of novel ferroelectrics for application in FeRAM. She is a member of the Science Policy Society at Penn State and a 2023 AGU local science partner. 

Acknowledgements 
We thank the Science Policy Society at Penn State for providing a platform for students to learn about science policy issues, develop writing skills, and collaborate on meaningful advocacy projects. 

References

  1. Calvão, Filipe, Catherine Erica Alexina Mcdonald, and Matthieu Bolay. 2021. “Cobalt Mining and the Corporate Outsourcing of Responsibility in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” The Extractive Industries and Society 8 (4): 100884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2021.02.004.
  2. Calvino, Soledad. 2022. “EPA Secures $13 Million under Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to Ensure Cleanup at Argonaut Mine Superfund Site Continues Full Force.” News Release. California. https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-secur es-13-million-under-bipartisan-infrastructure law-ensure-cleanup-argonaut. 
  3. Clean Energy Minerals Reform Act of 2022, H.R.7580, 117th Cong., 2nd sess., introduced in House April 26, 2022. 
  4. Chips and Science Act, Pub. L. No. 117-167, 136 Stat. 4392 (2022). 
  5. Driussi, Catherine, and Janis Jansz. 2006. “Technological Options for Waste Minimisation in the Mining Industry.” Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (8): 682-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.01.013 . 
  6. Inflation Reduction Act, Pub. L. No. 117-169, 136 Stat. 4392 (2022). 
  7. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, 23 U.S.C. § Pub. L. No. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429 (2021). 
  8. Held, Michael, and Robert Ilg. 2011. “Update of Environmental Indicators and Energy Payback Time of CdTe PV Systems in Europe.” Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 19 (5): 614–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.1068. 
  9. House Natural Resources Committee. 2021. “Committee Approves $25.6 Billion Reconciliation Measure to Fund Climate Corps, Coastal Protection, Wildfire Management, Tribal & Territorial Needs.” Press release. Washington, D.C. https://naturalresources.house.gov/media/pr ess-releases/committee-approves-256-billion reconciliation-measure-to-fund-climate-corps coastal-protection-wildfire-management-tribal -and-territorial-needs. 
  10. Knierzinger, Johannes. 2014. “The Socio-Political Implications of Bauxite Mining in Guinea: A Commodity Chain Perspective.” The Extractive Industries and Society 1 (1): 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2014.01.005. 
  11. Koch, Dirk-Jan, and Olga Burlyuk. 2020. “Bounded Policy Learning? EU Efforts to Anticipate Unintended Consequences in Conflict Minerals Legislation.” Journal of European Public Policy 27 (10): 1441–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.167 5744. 
  12. Lim, Seong-Rin, Carl W. Lam, and Julie M. Schoenung. 2010. “Quantity-Based and Toxicity-Based Evaluation of the U.S. Toxics Release Inventory.” Journal of Hazardous Materials 178 (1): 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.01.04 1. 
  13. Matthysen, Ken, and Andrés Zaragoza Montejano. 2013. “‘Conflict Minerals’ Initiatives in DR Congo: Perceptions of Local Mining Communities.” IPIS. 
  14. Mining Claims Under the General Mining Laws, 43 CFR Part 3800 et Seq. (1980) 
  15. General Mining Act of 1872, 30 U.S.C. § 2, ch. 152, 17 Stat. 91 (1872). 
  16. Mintzes, Aaron. 2022. “Harmful Mining Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act.” Earthworks. https://earthworks.org/blog/harmful-mining provisions-in-the-inflation-reduction-act/.
  17. Regulation (EU) 2017/821 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2017 laying down supply chain due diligence obligations for Union importers of tin, tantalum, and tungsten, their ores, and gold originating from conflict-affected and high-risk areas [2017] OJ L130/1. 
  18. Requirement of report regarding disclosure of registrant’s supply chain information regarding conflict minerals, 17 CFR § 240.1p-1 (2012). 
  19. ​Roberts, David. 2022. “Here Are the Minerals We Need for Batteries, Solar and Other Clean Energy Tech” Canary Media. https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean energy/the-minerals-used-by-clean-energy-tec hnologies. 
  20. Sovacool, Benjamin K., Saleem H. Ali, Morgan Bazilian, Ben Radley, Benoit Nemery, Julia Okatz, and Dustin Mulvaney. 2020. “Sustainable Minerals and Metals for a Low-Carbon Future.” Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz6003. US EPA. 2015. “Superfund National Priorities List (NPL)."
  21. Overviews and Factsheets. August 2017, 2015. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-n ational-priorities-list-npl. 
  22. Zimmermann, Alessandra. 2022. “R&D Funding Breakdown: Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.” AAAS.
DISCLAIMER: The findings and conclusions published herein are solely attributed to the author and not necessarily endorsed or adopted by the Journal of Science Policy and Governance. Articles are distributed in compliance with copyright and trademark agreements.

ISSN 2372-2193
© 2022 Journal of Science Policy & Governance, Inc. All rights reserved. The opinions, findings and conclusions from JSPG publications, additional article commentaries and related events do not necessarily reflect the views of the journal.