My last article as the AAPG Energy Minerals Division president has been a challenge. The world is a whole different place than it was 12 months ago. As good a place to start as any would be Avery Ash’s March 13 article for The National Interest, “The Strait of Hormuz Crisis Shows Why the US Must Stockpile Critical Minerals.”
Our industry is keenly aware of how much petroleum passes through the Strait of Hormuz. He points out, however, that the market remains cornered for critical minerals like germanium, gallium, antimony, and graphite. He concludes by writing:
“… energy security and mineral security both require a portfolio approach: domestic production where possible, allied sourcing where necessary, optimization of scarce inputs, diversification of technologies, and targeted strategic reserves for the materials most exposed to disruption. We are a powerhouse for oil and gas production, yet we remain dangerously exposed to global price volatility driven by flows through the Strait of Hormuz. This should be seen as a warm-up act for mineral supply disruptions – to address this ongoing risk, every option needs to be on the table.”
Although Ash fails to point out that the export ban on germanium, gallium, and antimony imposed by Beijing on the United States was temporarily lifted until later this year, the recognition is emerging that the conflict with Iran is affecting global sulfur supply chains.
Writing for the Modern War Institute at West Point, in their article, “The Chokepoint We Missed: Sulfur, Hormuz, and the Threats to Military Readiness,” Morgan Bazilian, Macdonald Amoah, and Jahara Matisek point out that the criticality of sulfur, which is not currently listed as a critical mineral by the U.S. Department of Interior, was overlooked. Sulfuric acid is used for many steps in hydrometallurgical leaching and solvent extraction processes. Sulfur production is “overwhelmingly a byproduct of processing sour natural gas and crude oil,” but they point out this byproduct trap effects copper extraction, battery pipelines, and semiconductor fabrication.
The understanding of byproducts of petroleum production is just as important as the energy produced from it. As the energy transition progresses, we as a society will need to find new byproducts in old materials. This should be a central focus in universities. However, one persistent issue that remains is the decline of geoscience programs around the globe.
Specialists Fit Niches, Generalists Survive
As I point out in one of my previous columns for the Explorer, the relationship of extractive industries to environmental geoscience is a zero-sum situation. Geoscience has three basic subdisciplines. These should be united by universities rather than parsed out at the undergraduate level. In my opinion, specialization within geoscience education has a detrimental impact on programs, more than it has within other disciplines.
Let me explain how I see it, from a naturalist perspective. Consider for example, the survivability of specialist versus generalist species in nature: when habitats change, generalist species can adapt, while specialist species tend to be more susceptible to extinction. This emphasis on specialization in undergraduate university education helps students quickly get better jobs in industry after graduation. However, it does not prepare them to survive an economic downturn where careers can end. This has led to a situation where the geoscience community as a whole suffers, as specialized individuals lack the adaptability necessary for success when changing career fields. For instance, if a young person who enjoys rocks and minerals watches a parent go through an industry layoff, he might be more inclined to pursue a career in another industry, and we potentially lose not one professional, but two.
Innovation originates from generalists. During extinction events, specialist species vacate ecological niches that generalists occupy. Adaptability equates to survivability: this is the fundamental stated reason for embracing diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in industry and academia. The absence of diverse general earth science education at the undergraduate level and the emphasis on industry-specific education leads students toward becoming specialists, ultimately resulting in their extinction. A recognized issue is that geoscience is a broad field of expertise, leading to specialization. Specialization should occur through individual projects, at the student-level, rather than at the university level. Encouraging university students to present research projects at conferences and participate in a professional community fosters resilience and adaptability, not specialization.