Consensus Study Report

NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This activity was supported by a contract between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Geological Survey (Award No. AWD-002021). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-73529-2
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/29068

This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242; https://nap.nationalacademies.org.

The manufacturer’s authorized representative in the European Union for product safety is Authorised Rep Compliance Ltd., Ground Floor, 71 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin D02 P593 Ireland; www.arccompliance.com.

Copyright 2025 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Meeting Future U.S. Mineral Resource Needs: The Role of the U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/29068.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. Tsu-Jae Liu is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.

Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.

For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.

COMMITTEE ON OPTIMIZING THE USGS MINERAL RESOURCES PROGRAM SCIENCE PORTFOLIO

RODERICK G. EGGERT (Co-Chair), Colorado School of Mines

CAROL D. FROST (Co-Chair), University of Wyoming

ROBERT J. BODNAR (NAS), Virginia Tech

NELIA W. DUNBAR, New Mexico Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources

THOMAS E. GRAEDEL (NAE), Yale University (until November 2024)

STEPHANIE B. GROCKE, Global Geologica, USA

RACHEL L. HAMPTON, KoBold Metals

DOUGLAS HOLLETT, MH Technology Partners

CECILIA LAZO-SKÖLD, Regeneration Enterprises, Inc.

STEVEN S. MASTERMAN, Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (retired)

KARIN E. OLSON HOAL, Cornell University

RICHARD S. SMITH, Laurentian University

DAVID ZHEN YIN, Stanford University

Study Staff

JONATHAN M. TUCKER, Study Director, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources

MORGAN DISBROW-MONZ, Program Officer, Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate

NOEL WALTERS, Associate Program Officer, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources

EMILY BERMUDEZ, Senior Program Assistant, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources (until October 2024)

MAYA FREY, Senior Program Assistant, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources (from July 2025)

BRYAN RUFF, Senior Program Assistant, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources (from October 2024–August 2025)

HANNA LEAPALDT, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow (from March 2025–June 2025)

BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES

MICHAEL MANGA (NAS) (Chair), University of California, Berkeley

MICHELE L. COOKE, University of Massachusetts Amherst

BRADLEY D. CRAMER, University of Iowa

MARY H. FEELEY, ExxonMobil (retired)

YOUSSEF M. HASHASH (NAE), University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

DOUGLAS HOLLET, MH Technology Partners

KATHARINE W. HUNTINGTON, University of Washington

KRISTEN KURLAND, Carnegie Mellon University

JESSICA P. MOORE, West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey

ANN S. OJEDA, Auburn University

DAVID B. SPEARS, Consulting Geologist

DAVID W. SZYMANSKI, Bentley University

JOLANTE W. VAN WIJK, Los Alamos National Laboratory

JESSICA M. WARREN, University of Delaware

Staff

DEBORAH GLICKSON, Board Director

CHARLES BURGIS, Program Officer

MAYA FREY, Senior Program Assistant

CYNTHIA GETNER, Senior Financial Business Partner

DOMINIQUE JENKINS, Senior Program Assistant

SAMUEL KRAFT, Senior Program Assistant

MILES LANSING, Program Coordinator (until August 2025)

SAMMANTHA L. MAGSINO, Senior Program Officer

BRYAN RUFF, Senior Program Assistant (until August 2025)

JONATHAN TUCKER, Program Officer

NOEL WALTERS, Associate Program Officer

Reviewers

This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by STEVEN JACOBSEN, University of Colorado Boulder, and GEORGE HORNBERGER (NAE), Vanderbilt University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.

This page intentionally left blank.

Acknowledgments

Many individuals assisted the committee in creating this report. The committee would like to thank the following people who gave presentations, participated in panel discussions, helped organize committee visits to U.S. Geological Survey facilities, and helped distribute questionnaires.

Contents

PREFACE

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

SUMMARY

1 INTRODUCTION

Report Organization

2 CHALLENGES TO MEETING U.S. MINERAL RESOURCE NEEDS

Challenge 1: Anticipating Future Demand for Minerals, Recognizing That Material Needs Change as Technologies Evolve

Challenge 2: Enhancing Resilience and Security of Supply for Mineral-Derived Materials

Challenge 3: Characterizing the Nation’s Mineral Resources, Including Unconventional and Secondary Resources

Challenge 4: Leveraging Large Datasets, Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, and Data Science

Challenge 5: Building Dynamism and Innovation into the U.S. Minerals Sector and Deploying Technological Innovations at Scale

Challenge 6: Transforming the Minerals Sector to Reduce Environmental and Social Disruptions

Challenge 7: Educating and Training the Evolving Workforce Needed to Address Mineral Challenges

Addressing These Challenges

3 CONTEXT AND OVERVIEW OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MINERAL RESOURCES PROGRAM

U.S. Federal Activities Related to Mineral Resources

U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resources Program

4 SCIENCE PROGRAMS

Mineral Information and Supply Chain Analysis

Mineral Resource Research and Assessments

Earth Mapping Resources Initiative

Mine Waste Program and Unconventional Resources

5 PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION

Mission and Execution Strategy

Budget

Staffing, Workforce, and Training

6 DATA AND PRODUCTS

Laboratories and Data Acquisition

Data Products and Delivery

7 PARTNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS

Government Entities

Academia

Industry

Overview

Public Engagement, Publicity, and Outreach

8 THE PATH FORWARD

REFERENCES

A COMMITTEE AND STAFF BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES

B QUESTIONNAIRES

C AGENDAS FOR U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY FACILITY SITE VISITS

Preface

Materials derived from mineral resources are essential components of the advanced technologies that support our modern quality of life, including those used in communication devices, computers, industrial equipment, defense systems, and components and batteries for energy production and storage. Assessing the availability of these mineral resources and the adequacy of their supply is increasingly relevant in the face of a changing geopolitical and economic landscape. Moreover, as technology evolves ever more rapidly, so do the specific mineral resources that are required. Comprehensive mineral resource information, science, and assessments are needed to address these challenges.

For nearly 150 years, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been the federal agency mandated to study and understand the nation’s mineral resources. Building on historical mineral data, in recent years the USGS Mineral Resources Program (MRP) has developed new methods to assess mineral resources and model their supply chains, examine potential mineral resources in legacy mine wastes and waste streams of modern mines, apply artificial intelligence and data science to accelerate assessments of mineral resources, and accelerate surface and subsurface mapping efforts.

Periodically, the USGS has requested reviews and assessments of its MRP performance, as well as analyses of national mineral needs, via consensus studies convened by the National Research Council (NRC, 1996, 2003, 2008). In the years since those reports, MRP has responded to new national directives including requirements to publish and update a list of critical minerals, conduct a national assessment of every critical mineral resource, and publish an annual critical minerals outlook. While MRP has responded vigorously to these directives, it also recognizes that an independent review of its activities would help ensure that its activities are aligned with current and future national mineral resource needs.

Accordingly, the USGS requested that the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (National Academies) undertake a new consensus study to pro-

vide an independent assessment of MRP. In response, the National Academies formed an ad hoc committee of experts with backgrounds in economic geology, mineral exploration, geochemistry, geometallurgy, exploration geophysics, mineralogy and petrology, mineral economics, data science, and geologic resource policy. Committee members have varied backgrounds in the private sector, academia, and state and federal agencies.

This report is the result of many hours of information gathering, evaluation, and deliberation. All committee members provided insights and took part in drafting the report. The committee is grateful to MRP for providing information and responding to questions, and to many stakeholders and partners, both in the United States and abroad, whose perspectives were invaluable in committee deliberations and preparation of this report. The committee was ably guided by Jonathan Tucker, with assistance from Emily Bermudez, Morgan Disbrow-Monz, Maya Frey, Bryan Ruff, and Noel Walters. We give them our heartfelt thanks. We also thank the reviewers for their constructive suggestions for the report.

Mineral resources will continue to serve an increasingly important role in supporting our nation’s quality of life. We hope this report will be helpful to MRP and its partners and stakeholders as they assemble and provide mineral science data, information, and analysis to the nation and other stakeholders.

Roderick G. Eggert, Co-Chair
Carol D. Frost, Co-Chair
Committee on Optimizing the USGS Mineral Resources Program Science Portfolio
August 2025

Acronyms and Abbreviations