总统议程未获成功:美国关键矿产和材料政策支持电动汽车转型

IF 7.4 2区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Khoi Hua, Eva Brungard, Kelly Lynn Anderson, Shannon Halinski, John A. Rupp, John D. Graham
{"title":"总统议程未获成功:美国关键矿产和材料政策支持电动汽车转型","authors":"Khoi Hua,&nbsp;Eva Brungard,&nbsp;Kelly Lynn Anderson,&nbsp;Shannon Halinski,&nbsp;John A. Rupp,&nbsp;John D. Graham","doi":"10.1016/j.erss.2025.103964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Presidents are important agenda setters in the U.S. policy making process, but the field of presidential studies has paid little attention toward critical minerals and materials policy. This article evaluates the efforts by Presidents Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden to spur the development of a domestic mining and processing sector to supply processed critical minerals and materials for electric vehicles. We focus on seven minerals and materials likely to be essential to batteries and magnet production in the near- and medium-term: cobalt, copper, graphite, lithium, manganese, neodymium, and nickel. Sourcing of these critical minerals and materials within the U.S. is seen as important from security, environmental, and economic perspectives. This article reveals a stunning paradox: three presidents, coming from different political parties and having a multitude of policy disagreements, uniformly agreed for fifteen years (2009–2023) that expanding mining and processing of critical minerals and materials in the U.S. is a national priority. Nevertheless, despite numerous presidential speeches, executive orders, agency activities, permitting processes, and subsidy/loan programs, minimal progress was made in stimulating additional U.S. mines for critical minerals and materials. Our analysis also explores why presidential agendas on critical minerals and materials policy did not lead to any meaningful change, highlighting systemic challenges, policy inconsistencies, and broader barriers, as well as suggestions for future research on how to make progress for the development of a robust U.S. supply chain to support the electric vehicle transition.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48384,"journal":{"name":"Energy Research & Social Science","volume":"121 ","pages":"Article 103964"},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Presidential agendas without success: United States critical minerals and materials policy to support the electric vehicle transition\",\"authors\":\"Khoi Hua,&nbsp;Eva Brungard,&nbsp;Kelly Lynn Anderson,&nbsp;Shannon Halinski,&nbsp;John A. Rupp,&nbsp;John D. Graham\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.erss.2025.103964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Presidents are important agenda setters in the U.S. policy making process, but the field of presidential studies has paid little attention toward critical minerals and materials policy. This article evaluates the efforts by Presidents Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden to spur the development of a domestic mining and processing sector to supply processed critical minerals and materials for electric vehicles. We focus on seven minerals and materials likely to be essential to batteries and magnet production in the near- and medium-term: cobalt, copper, graphite, lithium, manganese, neodymium, and nickel. Sourcing of these critical minerals and materials within the U.S. is seen as important from security, environmental, and economic perspectives. This article reveals a stunning paradox: three presidents, coming from different political parties and having a multitude of policy disagreements, uniformly agreed for fifteen years (2009–2023) that expanding mining and processing of critical minerals and materials in the U.S. is a national priority. Nevertheless, despite numerous presidential speeches, executive orders, agency activities, permitting processes, and subsidy/loan programs, minimal progress was made in stimulating additional U.S. mines for critical minerals and materials. Our analysis also explores why presidential agendas on critical minerals and materials policy did not lead to any meaningful change, highlighting systemic challenges, policy inconsistencies, and broader barriers, as well as suggestions for future research on how to make progress for the development of a robust U.S. supply chain to support the electric vehicle transition.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48384,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"volume\":\"121 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103964\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Energy Research & Social Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625000453\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Energy Research & Social Science","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629625000453","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

总统是美国政策制定过程中重要的议程制定者,但总统研究领域很少关注关键的矿产和材料政策。本文评估了奥巴马总统、唐纳德·特朗普总统和乔·拜登总统为刺激国内采矿和加工部门的发展,为电动汽车提供加工的关键矿物和材料所做的努力。我们重点关注在近期和中期可能对电池和磁铁生产至关重要的七种矿物和材料:钴、铜、石墨、锂、锰、钕和镍。从安全、环境和经济的角度来看,在美国境内采购这些关键的矿物和材料是非常重要的。这篇文章揭示了一个惊人的悖论:三位总统,来自不同的政党,在政策上有许多分歧,在15年(2009-2023)的时间里一致同意,扩大美国关键矿物和材料的开采和加工是国家的优先事项。然而,尽管有许多总统演讲、行政命令、机构活动、许可程序和补贴/贷款计划,但在刺激美国增加关键矿物和材料的开采方面进展甚微。我们的分析还探讨了为什么总统关于关键矿产和材料政策的议程没有带来任何有意义的变化,突出了系统性挑战、政策不一致和更广泛的障碍,以及对未来研究如何为美国强大供应链的发展取得进展以支持电动汽车转型的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Presidential agendas without success: United States critical minerals and materials policy to support the electric vehicle transition
Presidents are important agenda setters in the U.S. policy making process, but the field of presidential studies has paid little attention toward critical minerals and materials policy. This article evaluates the efforts by Presidents Barack Obama, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden to spur the development of a domestic mining and processing sector to supply processed critical minerals and materials for electric vehicles. We focus on seven minerals and materials likely to be essential to batteries and magnet production in the near- and medium-term: cobalt, copper, graphite, lithium, manganese, neodymium, and nickel. Sourcing of these critical minerals and materials within the U.S. is seen as important from security, environmental, and economic perspectives. This article reveals a stunning paradox: three presidents, coming from different political parties and having a multitude of policy disagreements, uniformly agreed for fifteen years (2009–2023) that expanding mining and processing of critical minerals and materials in the U.S. is a national priority. Nevertheless, despite numerous presidential speeches, executive orders, agency activities, permitting processes, and subsidy/loan programs, minimal progress was made in stimulating additional U.S. mines for critical minerals and materials. Our analysis also explores why presidential agendas on critical minerals and materials policy did not lead to any meaningful change, highlighting systemic challenges, policy inconsistencies, and broader barriers, as well as suggestions for future research on how to make progress for the development of a robust U.S. supply chain to support the electric vehicle transition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Energy Research & Social Science
Energy Research & Social Science ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES-
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
16.40%
发文量
441
审稿时长
55 days
期刊介绍: Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes original research and review articles examining the relationship between energy systems and society. ERSS covers a range of topics revolving around the intersection of energy technologies, fuels, and resources on one side and social processes and influences - including communities of energy users, people affected by energy production, social institutions, customs, traditions, behaviors, and policies - on the other. Put another way, ERSS investigates the social system surrounding energy technology and hardware. ERSS is relevant for energy practitioners, researchers interested in the social aspects of energy production or use, and policymakers. Energy Research & Social Science (ERSS) provides an interdisciplinary forum to discuss how social and technical issues related to energy production and consumption interact. Energy production, distribution, and consumption all have both technical and human components, and the latter involves the human causes and consequences of energy-related activities and processes as well as social structures that shape how people interact with energy systems. Energy analysis, therefore, needs to look beyond the dimensions of technology and economics to include these social and human elements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信