This is the most critical material for the green transition

To succeed with the green transition, we depend on a range of so-called critical materials. The common denominator for these materials is that they are essential for specific technologies and there is a risk that demand for them may exceed supply, either because they are rare, difficult to extract, or due to high demand.

There are many lists of critical materials, but few focus on the minerals that are most critical for achieving the transition to renewable energy.

‘Critical materials for the energy transition are the materials we absolutely need to build solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and other equipment for clean energy,’ says researcher Indra Øverland, who is the lead author of the new report Constructing a Ranking of Critical Materials for the Global Energy Transition.

• Also read: Critical materials for renewable energy: Improving data governance

Lithium is the most critical

In this report, researchers from NUPI and IRENA (International Renewable Energy Agency) have developed a method to identify and rank the critical materials needed for the global transition to renewable energy.

‘Ranking these is important to manage risks related to their availability. It’s more important to address potential scarcity of some materials over others,’ Øverland explains.

At the top of the list of critical materials for the green transition, we find an element that many are familiar with, namely lithium. Lithium particles are used for many purposes, including the treatment of mental disorders.

‘The reason lithium is so important for the green transition is that most electric vehicle batteries have lithium as their main component,’ says Øverland.

Lithium is followed by a number of other materials: cobalt, gallium, rare earth elements (REEs) including dysprosium, indium, neodymium, and praseodymium, platinum group metals (PGM), nickel, tellurium, graphite, manganese, copper, and germanium.

Several important findings

In addition to ranking the most critical materials, the report has several important findings.

• First, geopolitical, regulatory and technological changes and their impact on the various stages of mineral supply chains constantly alter the supply and demand for materials, making it hard to predict the exact set of materials that will be considered critical in the future.
• Second, this means that the mining and mineral-processing industries face fundamental uncertainties about future demand for critical materials. This could reduce or delay investment, in turn destabilising supply.
• Third, a narrow focus on scarcity carries a risk of overlooking other constraints, opportunities and technological developments.
• Fourth, definitions of criticality and lists of critical materials should be used with caution. Any list of critical materials will be influenced by the outlook of the authors, state or organisation that produced the list and the specific circumstances at the time the list was produced.
• Finally, if governments implement measures to reduce risks for investors involved in critical materials they should be careful to avoid micromanaging supplies of specific materials because which materials are seen as critical may change.