No critical minerals, no modern economy. Getty images

If you’re reading this on a phone, driving an EV, flying in a plane, or relying on the power grid to keep your lights on, you’re benefiting from critical minerals. These are the building blocks of modern life. Things like copper, lithium, nickel, rare earth elements, and titanium, they’re found in everything from smartphones to solar panels to F-35 fighter jets.

In short: no critical minerals, no modern economy.

These minerals aren’t just useful, they’re essential. And in the U.S., we don’t produce enough of them. Worse, we’re heavily dependent on countries that don’t always have our best interests at heart. That’s a serious vulnerability, and we’ve done far too little to fix it.

Where We Use Them and Why We’re Behind

Let’s start with where these minerals show up in daily American life:

  • Electric vehicles need lithium, cobalt, and nickel for batteries.
  • Wind turbines and solar panels rely on rare earths and specialty metals.
  • Defense systems require titanium, beryllium, and rare earths.
  • Basic infrastructure like power lines and buildings depend on copper and aluminum.

You’d think that something so central to the economy, and to national security, would be treated as a top priority. But we’ve let production and processing capabilities fall behind at home, and now we’re playing catch-up.

The Reality Check: We’re Not in Control

Right now, the U.S. is deeply reliant on foreign sources for critical minerals, especially China. And it’s not just about mining. China dominates processing and refining too, which means they control critical links in the supply chain.

Gabriel Collins and Michelle Michot Foss from the Baker Institute lay all this out in a recent report that every policymaker should read. Their argument is blunt: if we don’t get a handle on this, we’re in trouble, both economically and militarily.

China has already imposed export controls on key rare earth elements like dysprosium and terbium which are critical for magnets, batteries, and defense technologies, in direct response to new U.S. tariffs. This kind of tit-for-tat escalation exposes just how much leverage we’ve handed over. If this continues, American manufacturers could face serious material shortages, higher costs, and stalled projects.

We’ve seen this movie before, in the pandemic, when supply chains broke and countries scrambled for basics like PPE and semiconductors. We should’ve learned our lesson.

We Do Have a Stockpile, But We Need a Strategy

Unlike during the Cold War, the U.S. no longer maintains comprehensive strategic reserves across the board, but we do have stockpiles managed by the Defense Logistics Agency. The real issue isn’t absence, it’s strategy: what to stockpile, how much, and under what assumptions.

Collins and Michot Foss argue for a more robust and better-targeted approach. That could mean aiming for 12 to 18 months worth of demand for both civilian and defense applications. Achieving that will require:

  • Smarter government purchasing and long-term contracts
  • Strategic deals with allies (e.g., swapping titanium for artillery shells with Ukraine)
  • Financing mechanisms to help companies hold critical inventory for emergency use

It’s not cheap, but it’s cheaper than scrambling mid-crisis when supplies are suddenly cut off.

The Case for Advanced Materials: Substitutes That Work Today

One powerful but often overlooked solution is advanced materials, which can reduce our dependence on vulnerable mineral supply chains altogether.

Take carbon nanotube (CNT) fibers, a cutting-edge material invented at Rice University. CNTs are lighter, stronger, and more conductive than copper. And unlike some future tech, this isn’t hypothetical: we could substitute CNTs for copper wire harnesses in electrical systems today.

As Michot Foss explained on the Energy Forum podcast:

“You can substitute copper and steel and aluminum with carbon nanotube fibers and help offset some of those trade-offs and get performance enhancements as well… If you take carbon nanotube fibers and you put those into a wire harness… you're going to be reducing the weight of that wire harness versus a metal wire harness like we already use. And you're going to be getting the same benefit in terms of electrical conductivity, but more strength to allow the vehicle, the application, the aircraft, to perform better.”

By accelerating R&D and deployment of CNTs and similar substitutes, we can reduce pressure on strained mineral supply chains, lower emissions, and open the door to more secure and sustainable manufacturing.

We Have Tools. We Need to Use Them.

The report offers a long list of solutions. Some are familiar, like tax incentives, public-private partnerships, and fast-tracked permits. Others draw on historical precedent, like “preclusive purchasing,” a WWII tactic where the U.S. bought up materials just so enemies couldn’t.

We also need to get creative:

  • Repurpose existing industrial sites into mineral hubs
  • Speed up R&D for substitutes and recycling
  • Buy out risky foreign-owned assets in friendlier countries

Permitting remains one of the biggest hurdles. In the U.S., it can take 7 to 10 years to approve a new critical minerals project, a timeline that doesn’t match the urgency of our strategic needs. As Collins said on the Energy Forum podcast:

“Time kills deals... That’s why it’s more attractive generally to do these projects elsewhere.”

That’s the reality we’re up against. Long approval windows discourage investment and drive developers to friendlier jurisdictions abroad. One encouraging step is the use of the Defense Production Act to fast-track permitting under national security grounds. That kind of shift, treating permitting as a strategic imperative, must become the norm, not the exception.

It’s Time to Redefine Sustainability

Sustainability has traditionally focused on cutting carbon emissions. That’s still crucial, but we need a broader definition. Today, energy and materials security are just as important.

Countries are now weighing cost and reliability alongside emissions goals. We're also seeing renewed attention to recycling, biodiversity, and supply chain resilience.

Net-zero by 2050 is still a target. But reality is forcing a more nuanced discussion:

  • What level of warming is politically and economically sustainable?
  • What tradeoffs are we willing to make to ensure energy access and affordability?

The bottom line: we can’t build a clean energy future without secure access to materials. Recycling helps, but it’s not enough. We'll need new mines, new tech, and a more flexible definition of sustainability.

My Take: We’re Running Out of Time

This isn’t just a policy debate. It’s a test of whether we’ve learned anything from the past few years of disruption. We’re not facing an open war, but the risks are real and growing.

We need to treat critical minerals like what they are: a strategic necessity. That means rebuilding stockpiles, reshoring processing, tightening alliances, and accelerating permitting across the board.

It won’t be easy. But if we wait until a real crisis hits, it’ll be too late.

———

Scott Nyquist is a senior advisor at McKinsey & Company and vice chairman, Houston Energy Transition Initiative of the Greater Houston Partnership. The views expressed herein are Nyquist's own and not those of McKinsey & Company or of the Greater Houston Partnership. This article originally appeared on LinkedIn on April 11, 2025.


Ad Placement 300x100
Ad Placement 300x600

CultureMap Emails are Awesome

Houston AI startup rolls out platform to reshape oil and gas workflows

AI for energy

Houston-based Collide is looking to solve AI issues in the energy industry from within.

Co-founded by former oil roughneck Collin McLelland, the company has developed AI software for operators and field teams, shaped by firsthand oilfield experience. Its AI-native platform “retrieves and synthesizes data from authoritative sources to deliver accurate, cited, and energy-focused insights to oil and gas professionals,” according to the company.

“Oil and gas has a graveyard full of technology that was technically impressive and operationally useless,” McLelland tells Energy Capital. “The reason is almost always the same: the people who built it didn't understand what they were actually solving for. When you're an outsider, you see workflows and try to automate them. When you're an insider, you understand why those workflows exist—the regulatory constraints, the physical realities, the liability concerns, the trust dynamics between operators and service companies.”

Collide’s large language model, known as RIGGS, performed well in recent benchmarking results when taking a standardized petroleum engineering (SPE) exam, the company reports. The exam assesses understanding from conceptual terminology to complex mathematical problem-solving.

According to Collide, RIGGS achieved a score of 67.5 percent on a 40-question subset of the SPE petroleum engineering exam, outperforming other large language models like Grok 4 (62.5 percent), Claude Sonnet 4.5 (52.5 percent) and GPT 5.1 (4 percent).

RIGGS completed the test in 15 minutes, while Grok took two hours. Collide hopes over the next few months, RIGGS will receive a score between 75 percent to 80 percent accuracy.

The software could potentially help oil and gas companies produce accurate outputs and automate trivial workflows, which can open up valuable time for engineers and teams to work on other pressing matters, according to McLelland.

“Collide exists because we sat in those seats — we were the engineers, the operators, the field guys,” he says. ”RIGGS scoring higher on the PE exam versus the frontier labs isn't a party trick. It's evidence that the model understands petroleum engineering the way a petroleum engineer does, because it was built by people who do.”

RIGGS was trained on Collide’s Spindletop hardware and is supported by a vast library of information, as well as a reasoning engine and validation layer that uses logic to solve problems.

“Longer term, we see RIGGS as the intelligence layer that sits underneath every operator's workflow — not a chatbot you open in a browser, but something embedded in the tools engineers already use,” McLelland says. “The goal is to give every engineer the knowledge and pattern recognition of a 30-year veteran, on demand."

According to McLelland, Collide is already building toward reservoir analysis and production optimization, automated regulatory compliance (Railroad Commission filings, W-10s, G-10s), workover report generation, and engineering decision support in the field for near-term use cases. In March, Collide and Texas-based oil and gas operator Winn Resources announced a collaboration to automate the time-intensive process of filing monthly W-10 and G-10 forms with the Texas Railroad Commission, completing what’s normally a multi-hour task in under 30 minutes. Collide reports that Winn’s infrastructure now automates regulatory filings and provides real-time visibility into data gaps, which has reduced processing time by over 95 percent.

“Before Collide, I'd spend hours manually keying in filings,” Buck Crum, director of operations, said in a news release. “(In March), we had 50 wells to file and I was done in 20 minutes. It does the majority of the heavy lifting while keeping me in control. That human-in-the-loop approach saves meaningful time and gives us greater confidence in our compliance and reporting.”

Collide was originally launched by Houston media organization Digital Wildcatters as “a professional network and digital community for technical discussions and knowledge sharing.” After raising $5 million in seed funding led by Houston’s Mercury Fund last year, the company said it would shift its focus to rolling out its enterprise-level, AI-enabled solution.

Oxy officially announces CEO transition, names successor

new leader

Houston-based Occidental (Oxy) has officially announced its longtime CEO's retirement and her successor.

Oxy shared last week that Vicki Hollub will retire June 1. Reuters first reported Hollub's plan to retire in March, but a firm date had not been set. Hollub will remain on Oxy's board of directors.

Richard Jackson, who currently serves as Oxy's COO, will replace Hollub in the CEO role.

“It has been a privilege to lead Occidental and work alongside such a talented team for more than 40 years," Hollub shared in a news release. "Following the recently completed decade-long transformation of the company, we now have the best portfolio and the best technical expertise in Occidental’s history. With this strong foundation in place, a clear path forward and a leader like Richard, who has the experience and vision to elevate Occidental, now is the right time for this transition. “I look forward to supporting Richard and the Board through my continued role as a director.”

Hollub has held the top leadership position at Oxy since 2016 and has been with the energy giant for more than 40 years. Before being named CEO, she served as COO and senior executive vice president at the company. She led strategic acquisitions of Anadarko Petroleum in 2019 and CrownRock in 2024, and was the first woman selected to lead a major U.S. oil and gas company.

Hollub also played a key role in leading Oxy's future as a "carbon management company."

Jackson has been with Oxy since 2003. He has held numerous leadership positions, including president of U.S. onshore oil and gas, president of low carbon integrated technologies, general manager of the Permian Delaware Basin and enhanced oil recovery oil and gas, vice president of investor relations, and vice president of drilling Americas.

He was instrumental in launching Oxy Low Carbon Ventures, which focuses DAC, carbon sequestration and low-carbon fuels through businesses like 1PointFive, TerraLithium and others, according to the company. He also serves on the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative’s Climate Investment Board and the American Petroleum Institute’s Upstream Committee. He holds a bachelor's degree in petroleum engineering from Texas A&M University.

Jackson was named COO of Oxy in October 2025. In his new role as CEO, he will also join the board of directors, effective June 1.

“I am grateful to be appointed President and CEO of Occidental and excited about the opportunity to execute from the strong position and capabilities that we built under Vicki’s leadership,” Jackson added in the release. “It means a lot to me personally to be a part of our Occidental team. I am committed to delivering value from our significant and high-quality resource base. We have a tremendous opportunity to focus on organic improvement and execution to deliver meaningful value for our employees, shareholders and partners.”

Texas data center proposed by U.S. Army could use more power than El Paso

Big Data

The U.S. Army is proposing developing a gargantuan, 3-gigawatt data center complex on Fort Bliss property that within a few years would consume more electricity than all of El Paso Electric’s 460,000 customers combined – even as questions about its development, water usage and air pollution remain unanswered.

If built, it would be the third major data center project in the El Paso region, along with Meta Platform’s $10 billion facility in Northeast and the $165 billion Project Jupiter campus that Oracle and OpenAI are building in Santa Teresa, New Mexico. The combined scale and size of the three facilities could quickly transform the Borderland into one of the nation’s core hubs of power generation and AI infrastructure.

The publicly-traded investment firm Carlyle Group would pay to build and operate the Fort Bliss data center – one of several planned in a national rollout under President Donald Trump’s administration to rapidly increase artificial intelligence technology for the Department of Defense.

At Fort Bliss, the Army is “targeting an initial operating capacity of about 100 megawatts on the compute side” by next year, David Fitzgerald, deputy undersecretary of the Army, said during a meeting with reporters April 22. An official estimated cost for the project has yet to be released.

By 2029, the complex on military land in far East El Paso would require 3 gigawatts of electricity, Fitzgerald said. By comparison, El Paso Electric currently maintains about 2.9 gigawatts of generation capacity across its entire system that spans from Hatch, New Mexico, to Van Horn, Texas. The highest customer demand the power company has ever seen was just over 2.3 gigawatts during the summer of 2023.

And whether most El Pasoans are on board with the rapid buildout of another data center here is not a question that Army leadership is asking at this point.

“What we’re trying to do is find where are the common interests, common ground that we can solve for?” Fitzgerald said, referring to coordinating with El Paso city leaders on the data center project.

“The state of modern warfare and future warfare is largely going to depend on the ability to capture, process and utilize massive amounts of data,” he said. “So, the reality is, this is a strategic priority, not just for the Army, but for the entire Department of War. So, we need these capabilities, and we need to put them somewhere.”

Combined-cycle natural gas turbines are the “most likely” source of electricity generation for the facility, said Jeff Waksman, an assistant secretary of the Army and former member of Trump’s first administration.

Waksman said the facility would undergo environmental review before construction starts.

Still, there are far more outstanding questions than answers about the proposed Fort Bliss data center.

It’s unclear if the facility would connect to El Paso Water’s water system. The city-owned water utility pointed out that Fort Bliss Water provides water service for the installation. However, El Paso Water can provide “backup” service to the base, according to the project solicitation documents.

“EPWater was just recently brought into the discussion, and we only have preliminary information,” El Paso Water said in a statement. “The construction and water use would be entirely on federal property.”

El Paso Electric said it’s also uncertain whether the data center will connect to the utility’s power grid and will figure that out in the future. To date, the Army hasn’t made a formal request for service from El Paso Electric.

Officials from the U.S. Army “confirmed that questions regarding the power source and whether it will be connected to the regional grid remain under review and have plans to establish a data center with a projected demand of 3 gigawatts,” El Paso Electric said in a statement. “Ultimately, decisions about these matters will be made by Fort Bliss leadership, and we defer to them for further comment.”

A representative with Carlyle Group at a recent community meeting didn’t answer questions or provide details about the proposed data center facility and the related power generation source.

Carlyle Group did not respond to a request for comment.

Army officials said they don’t yet have a definitive agreement in place with Carlyle, which was conditionally selected to enter into exclusive negotiations, so few details are finalized.

However, the Army has set a short timeline to start operating by late 2027. That means construction will have to start soon, Fitzgerald said.

“The ideal endstate is that we would be at least (operational) by the end of ’27, which is moving pretty quick,” Fitzgerald said. “That would mean construction would need to begin in the not-so-distant future.”

Water, electricity concerns

Meeting three gigawatts of electricity demand with natural gas-fired turbines – cited by Army officials as the most likely power source – would likely produce huge amounts of greenhouse gases in a central area of El Paso, such as carbon dioxide, as well as other harmful pollutants including particulate matter.

And even if the data center doesn’t take service from El Paso Water and instead receives water from wells managed by Fort Bliss, it would rely on groundwater pumped out of the Hueco Bolson aquifer, the city’s main source of water.

The solicitation issued by the Army cites water risk for El Paso as “extremely high” and notes that most of Fort Bliss’ water supply comes from wells within the installation.

Fitzgerald said the Army is aware of the public’s concern that the data center could unsustainably guzzle El Paso’s groundwater to cool the data center’s computer servers. He said the facility will be “water neutral.”

It’s also not clear how the project could replace the same amount of water that it consumes.

It’s possible the Kay Bailey Hutchison Desalination Plant – co-owned by El Paso Water and the U.S. Army – could play a role in making the data center water neutral. But El Paso Water said it has no details about how the data center facility could achieve water neutrality.

El Paso Water is “more than willing to continue to share ideas for best practices in sustainability to help protect our regional water resources,” the utility said in its statement.

As far as electricity generation, Army officials said they don’t know if El Paso Electric would build a new power plant to serve the data center. It’s also possible that Carlyle Group or another private company could build its own power generation source for the data center that’s isolated from the power grid El Pasoans use every day.

“We have to decide whether El Paso Electric is going to be the ones building whatever is coming, or if this is going to be some independent power producer,” Waksman said.

El Paso Electric is planning to develop a 366 megawatt power plant made up of over 800 small gas generators to power Meta’s data center. The utility will build more generation in the coming years to meet 1 gigawatt of total demand from Meta’s facility. Meanwhile, as the technology giant Oracle develops Project Jupiter, the company said Monday it is seeking to power the campus using 2.45 gigawatts of fuel cell power systems provided by the company Bloom Energy.

For perspective, 3.45 gigawatts – the combined projected demand of those two major data centers – is enough electricity to power as many as a million homes, depending on the time of day and weather.

The Fort Bliss project would have to meet environmental regulatory requirements, and the developer needs to include a plan for providing utilities and infrastructure needs such as access to the facility, according to a request for proposals issued by the Army in December 2025. Army officials emphasized the project would not impact El Pasoans’ water or electric bills.

Who is Carlyle Group?

Carlyle Group is a global investment management firm that oversees $477 billion of assets from entities such as pension funds.

The company invests that money by buying businesses ranging from wine producers to Asian telecommunications companies, or by developing infrastructure projects such as renewable energy generation and data centers. The company in 2025 posted distributable earnings of nearly $1.7 billion on $4.8 billion in revenue.

The Army wants to build the facility at Fort Bliss in partnership with Carlyle because the installation has a large amount of available, unused land and because of the water and electricity infrastructure already in place in El Paso, Fitzgerald said.

The Carlyle data center planned for El Paso is part of a wider U.S. military effort to quickly build infrastructure that supports the use of artificial intelligence — both on the battlefield and in running its day-to-day operations, according to government documents.

Army officials nodded to the use of AI in drone warfare and targeting systems. And a hyperscale data center facility can also securely house information such as the military’s cloud database that details pay and entitlements for every U.S. soldier, said Maj. Gen. Curtis Taylor, commanding general of the 1st Armored Division and Fort Bliss.

Data centers are “essential parts of power projection,” Taylor said. “But we have to protect those servers. And that’s why there’s great utility in building that infrastructure on military installations.”

The Fort Bliss facility would be located on a plot of land near the intersection of Loop 375 and Montana Avenue. The site is just east of the Camp East Montana immigrant detention facility, and near El Paso Electric’s gas-fired Montana power station.

The plan is for Carlyle to utilize the majority of the data center’s capacity for its business needs, and the military would have access to a more secure portion of the data center for its own uses.

The Army is developing another similar data center project in Dugway, Utah. Other Army bases identified as potential sites include Fort Hood in Texas and Fort Bragg in North Carolina.

The U.S. Air Force in October issued a solicitation saying it is “accepting proposals for the development of Artificial Intelligence data centers,” on unused land at different bases, including in California, Georgia, Arizona and Tennessee. The push was enabled by executive orders signed by Trump that seek to speed up permitting and development timelines for AI data centers.

Would the Fort Bliss data center pay taxes?

A privately-financed data center on Fort Bliss would likely have to pay some taxes – unlike on-base government facilities – but there’s a lot of uncertainty.

Carlyle Group is leasing the land for the data center under an “enhanced use lease” that allows branches of the military to rent under-used land on bases.

Land on federal installations is not subject to state or local taxes. However, the statute that authorizes the U.S. military to lease excess land to private entities says that “the interest of a lessee of property leased under this section may be taxed by State or local governments.”

So, while the land the data center is built on would not be subject to taxation, the structures housing the data center could be subject to local property taxes.

But it depends on how the deal is structured, including factors such as whether Carlyle or the Army ultimately takes ownership of the buildings.

The Army in January awarded a contract to Korean-owned Hanwha Defense USA, which will invest $1.3 billion to develop a munitions factory at a base in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, using an enhanced use lease.

Fitzgerald, the Army undersecretary, acknowledged the public pushback to other data centers such as Meta and Project Jupiter. But he said the Army wants to ensure the project is developed “the right way.”

“There are always elements that will kind of make this an ‘us versus them’ sort of a construct, but I don’t think we view it that way from the Army,” he said. “I think there’s a path here that will benefit not just the installation, but the community as well.”