Critical minerals underpin industries ranging from clean energy and advanced manufacturing to defense systems and agriculture. The 2025 update adds arsenic, boron, metallurgical coal, phosphate, tellurium, and uranium following extensive interagency review and public comment. The additions reflect a broadened understanding of mineral dependency—one that encompasses both energy security and food security considerations.
The Department of Energy (DOE) supported the inclusion of metallurgical coal and uranium, citing their roles in steelmaking, energy generation, and national defense. The Department of Agriculture (USDA) recommended phosphate due to its central importance to fertilizer production and global food supply stability. Meanwhile, the Department of War (DOW) highlighted arsenic and tellurium for their strategic significance in semiconductor and defense technologies.
The updated list fulfills statutory obligations under Section 7002 of the Energy Act of 2020, which requires the Secretary of the Interior to review and revise the list at least every three years. It also aligns with two recent Executive Orders:
The 2025 methodology represents a significant advancement in how the federal government evaluates mineral criticality. The USGS modeled over 1,200 disruption scenarios across 84 mineral commodities and 402 industries, assessing both economic and national security impacts. The analysis identified commodities that, if disrupted, could cause widespread industrial and economic consequences.
The methodology, documented in USGS Open-File Report 2025-1047, also accounts for single points of failure in domestic supply chains—instances where the U.S. relies on a single producer or processing facility for a given mineral. This risk-based framework moves beyond static supply assessments, providing a dynamic tool for policymakers and industry planners.
The updated list is part of a broader national effort to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign mineral imports, particularly from regions prone to geopolitical instability. Many critical minerals are sourced from countries where production is concentrated among few suppliers, increasing the risk of trade disruptions and price volatility.
The USGS emphasizes that the 2025 list is not static. It will be reviewed and updated at least every two years to reflect evolving market realities and policy goals. This dynamic approach ensures that federal agencies, industries, and investors can align their strategies with the latest data on mineral availability and supply chain risk.
“Critical minerals are the foundation of modern industry,” the agency noted. “By identifying these materials and their vulnerabilities, the United States can strengthen domestic production, spur innovation, and safeguard economic and national security.”
While the final list focuses on minerals meeting the statutory criteria for criticality, the USGS acknowledged that many unlisted minerals remain economically and strategically significant. The agency underscored that other government entities may define or track additional resources according to their operational or policy needs.
By expanding the 2025 list and refining its analytical framework, the U.S. government signals a long-term commitment to securing the materials essential for clean energy, defense, and technological leadership—a cornerstone of the nation’s broader economic resilience strategy.
