US grain growers applaud larger vital minerals list

The addition last week of phosphate and potash to a government list of 60 minerals critical to US security was cheered by large US agricultural organizations.

The Department of the Interior (DOI), via the US Geological Survey, published its final 2025 List of Critical Materials document on Nov. 7. Ten new materials were added to the list, now numbering 60, of minerals that are vital to the US economy and national security and that face potential risks from disrupted supply chains, the DOI said.

The list is in its third iteration since being created in 2017 under an executive order directing federal agencies to enhance mineral security. The list, for non-fuel materials only, is intended to be modified to reflect new data and changing supply conditions. Federal law (the Energy Act of 2020) requires the list to be reviewed every three years, but the DOI said it will be updated every two years to reflect evolving circumstances.

“In 2017, President Trump set a goal of first identifying and then securing the mineral resources needed to bolster America’s economy and national security,” said Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum. “The 2025 List of Critical Minerals provides a clear, data-driven roadmap to reduce our dependence on foreign adversaries, expand domestic production and unleash American innovation. By working with the mineral industry and state partners, we are ensuring that the minerals powering our energy, defense and technology supply chains are mined and processed in the United States, which is becoming a mineral powerhouse once again.”

Under the critical minerals designation, programs to mine, process or recycle the materials may be eligible for federal tax credits, streamlined paths to permitting and priority consideration for grants or loans.

The final list includes 10 additions: boron, copper, lead, metallurgical coal, phosphate, potash, rhenium, silicon, silver and uranium. Two, potash and phosphate, are among the fertilizer chemicals the US agriculture industry relies on. The United States relies on Canada for about 97% of its potash supply. The mineral was on the list in 2018 and subsequently removed. It’s back, reflecting requests from farm and fertilizer industry groups, who see potash as a vital input for crop production that is vulnerable to global supply disruptions.

Grain associations react

The National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) said the appended minerals are vital components of fertilizer and play a central role in ensuring productive, sustainable wheat production across the United States.

The American Soybean Association (ASA) said phosphate and potash are critical additions to the list and cautioned additional measures are needed to bolster supply chains and reduce costs for US farmers.

“As we look toward the next planting season, soybean farmers are concerned about the increasing cost of farming inputs, including fertilizer,” said ASA president and Kentucky farmer Caleb Ragland. “By recognizing phosphate and potash as critical minerals, the US Geological Survey has underscored the importance of a reliable domestic fertilizer supply. While more work remains to strengthen supply chains and reduce costs for farmers, today’s announcement is a meaningful step toward greater stability and security for US agriculture.”

USA Rice said phosphate and potash are critically important because nutrient availability serves as an essential function of both crop quality and yields, further impacting input cost volatility.

“For rice farmers, both phosphate and potash are as critical as having water,” said Fred Zaunbrecher, Louisiana rice farmer and chair of the USA Rice Farmers board of directors. “These are vital nutrients the plant needs for grain formation, quality and overall plant health. Given our reliance on these import-heavy nutrients, a shortage or disruption to the supply would directly reduce yields, lower the quality, and threaten the economic viability of farming rice here in the United States. Without these two key inputs, our farmers would not be able to produce a crop, period.”