The term "critical minerals" is used a lot these days, and it’s not always used with precision. It should be used to describe minerals (or elements) that are both essential to a nation's economic and strategic interests and at risk of supply disruptions. Put simply, you need it and it might become hard to get. Identifying need is usually based on global technology needs, such as for advanced manufacturing and defence, and importantly for emissions reduction technologies because our plans for the energy transition require us to move so much faster than these sorts of things tend to naturally develop. A lot of the materials we need for the energy transition has not been used in much volume before, so the supply chain is not mature yet for the volumes we will soon need. We are going to need different kinds of minerals and more minerals overall to build the solar panels, wind turbines, electric vehicles and battery storage we need to get to net zero, and expansion of electricity grids to enable that.

That definition sounds simple. But when you look at different published lists of critical minerals, they aren’t all the same. Why can’t anyone seem to agree on what counts as critical minerals?

“You need it and it might become hard to get” is a simple phrase that hides a lot of ambiguity.

We used to think we needed cobalt to make lithium ion batteries, until lithium iron phosphate batteries were commercialized. They don’t use any cobalt. Likewise, a mineral being “hard to get,” is not black and white. The mineral might be scarce, or abundant but hard to extract and process to a usable form. Lithium is an example of an abundant element that has traditionally been hard to process from most sources.

The list of minerals that fit the definition of “critical” is not fixed. It is inherently subjective and varies according to geographical, technological, and temporal contexts. It evolves with advancements in processing methods, such as those Lava Blue is developing, the discovery of substitute materials, and the emergence of novel technologies in energy generation and storage.

Historically, the alarm over mineral scarcity is not new. In 1924, copper expert Ira Joralemon predicted a shortage of copper, essential for electrical power, which would threaten the basis of civilization.

“... the age of electricity and of copper will be short. At the intense rate of production that must come, the copper supply of the world will last hardly a score of years. ... Our civilization based on electrical power will dwindle and die.”

Contrary to this prediction, copper production has increased twenty-fold in the hundred years since that prediction was made. One might wonder if future generations will regard the current focus on today's critical minerals as misplaced concern, given the dynamic nature of technological and industrial development. Let’s dig a bit deeper.

Currently, there are 26 critical minerals on Australia’s list, 50 on the United States’ and other countries have numbers in between. Many minerals feature on one but not all countries’ lists, but there are some common to all that are the topic of most contention recently.

Lithium, for instance, once primarily used in medicine, has seen its demand surge with the rise of battery technology, now consuming about 70% of global lithium production for use in electric vehicles (EVs) and stationary storage. Though not scarce – there is more than enough lithium in our oceans alone to supply the energy transition – lithium's economic extraction is a challenge, prompting innovative approaches to sourcing and processing this essential component of battery technology. But the recent spike in demand and prospect of high prices in the future has led to innovation related to new sources of lithium and new processes to take it from rock or seawater and turn it into battery-grade lithium carbonate or lithium hydroxide. Additionally, while there are currently few substitutes for lithium that can perform to the same standards in battery technology, emerging battery technologies such as sodium ion are emerging to replace some of the less demanding battery applications.

Rare earths, are a group of 17 elements with unique properties crucial for the high-strength magnets used in wind turbines and electric motors. While not indispensable for these technologies, the advantages they offer in terms of efficiency and size are significant. Yet, their extraction and refinement are fraught with economic and environmental hurdles, often involving radioactive by-products that necessitate stringent controls to mitigate environmental harm.

Cobalt is one of the most controversial critical minerals. Its place on the critical list is due to it's role in batteries, but before its use in batteries, the main use of cobalt was as a blue pigment in glass, glazes, and ceramics, plus industrial applications like tool steels, magnets and catalysts. Cobalt is used in the cathode of many lithium-ion batteries because it enables a high energy density and a long cycle life. The controversy surrounding cobalt is due to environmental and social harms related to its mining. Environmentally, cobalt mining can be disruptive, leading to deforestation and water pollution. Socially, cobalt’s mining practices have been under scrutiny, especially in so-called “artisanal mines” in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Issues range from unsafe working conditions to outright exploitation, including child labor and unfair wages. The quest for cobalt-free battery technologies reflects the growing pressure to address these concerns.

Those are the critical minerals that tend to attract the most attention, but each of the 26 materials on Australia’s critical minerals list fill an important niche. To give just a few more examples: Tungsten is used in various high-temperature applications and electronics. High purity alumina (HPA) is integral to LED lighting and increasingly in battery separators. Graphite is used in battery anodes, and the most expensive material in a typical battery.

This brief examination of critical minerals reflects the nuanced and evolving nature of what defines a mineral as 'critical,' influenced by technological, environmental, and social factors that extend far beyond simple scarcity. As the energy transition progresses, the importance of these minerals is underscored by the continuous push for more responsible sourcing and advanced material science.

Back to the question asked earlier: will future generations think our current obsession with today’s critical minerals was silly? This is the wrong question to ask. Dipping into the critical mineral conversation is more than a forecast; it’s a strategy session for the energy transition’s game plan. Circling back to the old fears of copper depletion casting a shadow on electrical civilization, it serves as a reminder, not of destiny, but of preparedness. Listing critical minerals isn't about crystal-gazing to predict the future and later claim bragging rights; it's about pinpointing potential supply snags early, to either bolster our resources or innovate beyond constrained supply chains.

As the global thrust shifts from drilling for oil to mining and processing critical minerals, the playing field is bound to see its share of victors and vanquished. For Australia, it’s a crossroads moment: the paths we choose today could either crown us as a key player in the new mineral rush or see us sidelined. The future of our resource-rich nation hangs in the balance, hinged on the decisions we make in this pivotal time.