House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources (Begich): Oversight hearing titled "Powering the 21st Century with American Copper."

The Subcommittee on Energy and Minerals Resources will come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare recess of the committee at any time. Under Committee Rule 4, any oral opening statements at hearings are limited to the chairman and the ranking minority member. I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah, Mr. Kennedy, be allowed to participate in today's hearing. The gentleman from Montana, Mr.

Downing, be allowed to participate in today's hearing. The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Palmer, be allowed to participate in today's hearing. I now recognize myself for an opening statement. I'll start by thanking our witnesses for Thank you for being here today to discuss the very important issue of powering the 21st century with American copper. Under the leadership of President Trump and House Republicans, the United States is delivering historic progress towards minerals dominance for the American people.

Here in the United States, we are blessed with vast natural resources, including copper. My district in northern Minnesota is home to the Duluth complex, one of the largest untapped copper nickel deposits in the entire world. Likewise, my district is also home to a skilled union workforce eager to responsibly mine it. Across our nation, the copper industry directly employs 65,000 people with over $31 billion in annual wages and benefits. These are meaningful, high-paying jobs that support families and communities by producing the copper that is vital for the modern world.

Copper is essential for nearly everything that, that produces or uses electricity. Wiring, circuitry, and electric motors all require copper. Water in your home, fire protection systems, and medical equipment in a hospital all rely on copper piping. By this time of the day, it's hard to count how many times we have all benefited from copper, from the lighting in our home, the hot shower to start our day, appliances in our kitchens, the car, conventional, conventional or electric that brought us here to the phone in our pockets and the computer system supporting this hearing. Beyond these items we use personally, there is an electric grid that powers the country, communication systems that connect us all, and advanced technologies that underpin our national security.

Copper is indispensable element that makes it all work. The importance of copper to all these systems is driving an increase in demand. S&P Global's Copper in the Age of AI report identifies, quote, a transformative trajectory for copper demand, projecting a surge from 28 million metric tons in 2025 to 42 million metric tons by 2040, a 50% increase that underscores the metal's pivotal role in multiple technological and economic domains. End quote. It is sobering to note that the study projects a 10 million metric ton gap between supply and demand by 2040.

Without meaningful supply expansion, that would mean a 20% global shortfall. Such a shortfall would exacerbate the geopolitical struggle over natural resources that we find ourselves in with China. If the United States does not get serious about securing our mineral independence including our copper independence, we will continue to be susceptible to the Communist Chinese Party. Copper is a vital source— resource, rather— and I believe we should work quickly to expand domestic production and processing. This subcommittee has produced, and the House has passed, several bills to advance that objective.

Chairman Westerman's H.R. 4776, The Bipartisan Speed Act, which would reform federal permitting processes to let America build the infrastructure projects, including mining projects that are so necessary for our country. My bill, H.R. 4090, Which builds on President Trump's efforts by codifying aspects of 3 executive orders relating to hard rock mining. Our fellow committee member, Mr. Amodei, introduced H.R.

1366 To restore clarity and stability to mining operations and support reclamation of abandoned hard rock mines. H.R. 755 From our colleague Mr. Siskmani would unify the U.S. Geological Survey's list of critical minerals and the Department of Energy's list of critical minerals. The full committee has also passed two bills, H.R. 1501 And Mr. Shreve's H.R.

5929 For Mr. Barr, which would provide FAST-41 coverage to mining and mineral processing projects. And just this Monday, the president signed into law H.J. Res. 140, My Congressional Review Act resolution that reversed the Biden administration's lockup of northern Minnesota's Duluth complex, the largest untapped copper-nickel find in the world. To unleash our vast natural resources, we must take decisive action to cut through the red tape and years of policies that were developed to hinder mining.

Our national security and economic well-being depend on a reliable, affordable supply of copper. We simply must do more to develop domestic supply chains and ensure that our country has the copper it needs. I know my constituents in northern Minnesota are ready to step up and do their part, and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on this important topic and will now yield to the ranking member for her statement. Representative Ansari.

Thank you so much, Chair Stauber. Copper is in almost everything that we touch in the 21st century. The wires in our walls, our cell phones, the cars we drive, and the grid that keeps the lights on. It is also foundational to America's energy future. It is in wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, transmission lines, and electric vehicles, which, despite unrelenting attacks from the current president, will inevitably continue to grow.

Because clean energy is affordable, stable, and cannot be held hostage by foreign oil wars. Because of all of this, demand for copper will rise, and as it does, we must prioritize a secure, resilient, and responsible mineral supply chain that starts with using the copper we already have, which is almost infinitely reusable. We need a robust recycling program, stronger collection systems, and more domestic processing capacity so valuable scrap is reused here at home instead of shipped overseas. Recovering copper from retired equipment, buildings, and electronics is often faster, cheaper, and cleaner than starting from scratch. It also means responsible domestic mining with real safeguards.

We need strong environmental standards that protect communities, clean air, and clean water. We need modern bonding requirements so that taxpayers are not left with the cost of cleanup. And we need meaningful tribal consultation because nearly 90% of copper reserves and resources in the United States are within just 35 miles of tribal land. Unfortunately, mining has a challenging history in the United States, especially for tribal communities who still suffer from polluted water, abandoned mine waste, and scars across the landscape. If we want public trust for new projects, we must prove that today's mining industry will operate differently.

And our regulations must match that reality. I am supportive of responsible mining, especially being from Arizona, which is the largest copper-producing state by far. But we still know that mining alone is not a strategy to compete with our strategic adversaries like China. The United States needs a whole-of-supply-chain approach that lets us make things here again. As I said, that's more recycling, strong and safe refining and smelting capacity, and modern manufacturing.

We have just 2 copper smelters in the United States, and both are at or near full capacity. Meanwhile, more than half of global smelting capacity is in China, and that share is expected to grow. Right now, we are already shipping raw copper ore mined in the United States abroad, including to China. The United States is also exporting massive amounts of scrap metal, including copper, instead of turning that material into American-made products. We should all agree that exporting strategic materials while importing finished goods is a wasted opportunity for workers, manufacturers, the economy, and our national security.

Even if we mine and refine more copper in the United States, we will not have a secure supply chain without domestic manufacturing capacity to turn that copper into finished products here at home. Instead, the Trump administration's attacks on clean energy incentives, tariffs that raise costs for manufacturers, and uncertainty for private investment especially investment in clean and affordable energy, have undermined the very domestic industries that drive copper demand and create good-paying American jobs. Weakening clean energy manufacturing does not strengthen supply chains. It risks ceding the next generation of industrial leadership to competitors like China. If we are serious about copper security, then the answer is not simply to dig more.

It is to mine responsibly, recycle aggressively, manufacture competitively, and build the clean energy economy here in the United States of America. One final missing link is smart demand management. In a resource-constrained environment, we should prioritize copper uses that strengthen the grid, modernize infrastructure, deploy clean energy, and electrify transportation—uses that will make life safer and more affordable for everyday Americans. Strategic minerals should support strategic priorities. I look forward to the discussion and I yield back.

Thank you very much. I will now yield to the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Westerman, for your opening statement. Well, thank you, Chairman Staubach, for holding this very important hearing. And thank you to all of our witnesses for testifying today. We focused quite a bit in this committee on critical minerals, and the S&P Global report, Copper in the Age of AI, really brings home how critical copper is to our way of life and the challenges we're facing to ensure that we continue to have an adequate supply here.

As Dr. Juergen testified, the world is facing a potential supply shortfall of 20% unless there is a meaningful supply expansion. As I understand it, the price of copper increased 7.6% last year and is projected to increase another 14.5% this year. Given the widespread reliance on copper for so many uses, I'm concerned about the ripple effect through our economy if this trend continues, and it doesn't look like there's anything on the horizon to, to stymie it right now. The S&P report focuses on the challenges of electrification and notes that global electricity demand will grow nearly 50% by 2040. Now, much of that global demand is driven by the increasing use of electricity for cooking, heating, and air conditioners in the, the developing world.

Here in the U.S., electricity use may grow as much as 2.5% each year. And according to the Edison Electric Institute, investor-owned utilities will spend over $1.1 trillion over the next 5 years to meet the growing demand. As Ms. Phillips noted in her testimony, this domestic growth is being driven by AI, advanced manufacturing, and the electrification of transportation, buildings, and industry. Adequate, reliable, and affordable supplies of copper are essential to this infrastructure development, and the need for permitting reform spans it all. To develop the abundant resources we are blessed with here in America, Mr. Estelle's copper producers need timely and predictable permitting to secure investment and grow the domestic supply.

Mr. Phillips' member companies— or Ms. Phillips' member companies need timely, predictable permitting to build the facilities that will use that copper and manufacture the equipment necessary for our electric utilities. Finally, the utilities desperately need timely, predictable permitting to increase our electricity generation and expand the grid. The S&P Global report states, and I'm quoting from this, The intersection of accelerating demand, constrained supply, and concentrated processing capacity creates systemic risk that require responses from policymakers, regulators, industry, and investors. The choices made in the coming years will determine whether copper remains an enabler of progress or becomes a bottleneck to growth and innovation. I say as a nation, Mr. Chairman, that we can't allow copper to become a constraint on our economy, because China certainly won't let that happen.

And if we look at the global production of China, because we have allowed domestic copper production to atrophy here, we are down to just 2 operating smelters here in the US while China has 45. If you look back just 30 years ago, we were producing twice as much copper as China. And today they're producing, I believe the number is somewhere around 11 times, 10 or 11 times as much as we produce here. That's not because copper became a bad business in the US. It's not because we didn't foresee a need for copper.

It's because we just let it move overseas. We quit building smelters, we quit mining, and we gave that industry to our global competitor. And it's really coming back to bite us right now. But I think we still have time to, to, to change the course of the ship and to get our country back on the right track. And because we are competing with China for the necessary resources to maintain our very supply of electricity and to promote our leadership in artificial intelligence, the S&P Global report stresses that the availability of copper could be a constraining factor on expanding that essential flow of electricity and thus on all— on the roll rollout of AI and the promise it holds for efficiency and innovation.

Similarly, as Mr. Estelle noted in his testimony, maintaining American leadership in artificial intelligence is in a very direct sense a copper challenge. Uh, this is not a competition we can afford to lose to China. It's not something that we're going to be able to recycle our way out of. We need to do more recycling. We need to be responsible stewards of what we've got, but the numbers just don't add up.

We've got to mine more copper if we're going to meet the demands. And if we're going to meet the demands that we have for copper, then permitting reform is, is necessary to ensure that we have robust domestic supplies of copper and the ability to process the copper. This is vital for our national security, it's vital to our energy security, and it's also vital to our leadership NAI. Mr. Chairman, I yield back and look forward to hearing the witness testimony. Thank you, Chairman Westerman.

We will now begin our witness panel. Let me remind the witnesses that under committee rules, they must limit their oral statements to 5 minutes, but their entire statement will appear in the hearing record. To begin your testimony, please press the on button on the microphone. We use timing lights. When you begin, the light will turn green.

At the end of 5 minutes, the light will turn red, and I will ask you to please complete your statement I will allow all witnesses to testify before member questioning. Our first witness is Dr. Daniel Juergen. He is the vice chairman of the SAP Global, and he is stationed in Washington, D.C. Dr. Juergen, this report is phenomenal. You folks did a great job, and I appreciate that. You are now recognized for 5 minutes.

Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Huffman, Subcommittee Chairman Stauber, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Ansari, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. And thank you, Chairman Stauber and Chairman Westerman, for the citation of our study, which does point to a 50% increase in copper demand in less than 15 years. And that underscores copper's pivotal role. It also points out, as you do, to the 10 million ton shortfall by 2040 without meaningful supply response. And that's with an incredibly aggressive recycling happening, a 2.5 times increase.

So this increase in demand in copper arises from the simple fact that copper is a metal of electrification. And we're looking around the world at electricity demand growing by almost 50% in the next 14 years. It's happening in the US and it's happening around the world. Utilities that were— had flat demand in the US are now looking at 5 to 8% growth in one year. What's happening in terms of copper is growth along 5 vectors, of which the most recent is artificial intelligence and data centers and humanoid robots.

Data centers are electricity intensive and copper is used throughout the system. We think by 2030, data centers alone could rise from 5% of US electricity consumption to 14%. That's in, in less than half a decade. While AI is creating a new vector of copper demand, it's not the largest by any means. It's this core economic demand that began when Thomas Edison laid 82,000 feet of copper cables under the Lower Manhattan in 1882 to electrify Lower Manhattan.

And today it's reflected in everything— what we'll be hearing from the other witnesses— from appliances to manufacturing. And this sector of— this vector of demand continues to grow. A second vector of demand is energy transition and addition. EVs require 2.9 times more copper than a conventional car, and the population of EVs is growing. Solar and wind require a lot of copper, much more than people recognize.

But energy transition takes another form as well. It's the populations in the developing world that are moving from wood and waste for their heating and cooking to commercial energy, including electricity. Between now and 2040, about 2 billion more air conditioners will be added in the developing world. Defense is a key vector of current copper demand, and you all know what rising geopolitical tensions and the electrification of military systems is driving the need for more copper. Finally, this fifth vector of demand is humanoid robots.

Which is only at the cusp, and humanoid robots will be wired, they will be copper-wired. So even as global demand is accelerating along these vectors, these 5 vectors, the current supply is on course to decline as existing resources age. So copper supply is a global story where the U.S. has a major role to play. In 1990, the U.S. copper production represented 18% of global production and 19% of, of production. Now the picture is starkly different, 4% and 3% respectively.

I know that number 45 smelters in China gets used. The numbers we're looking at is something like over 60 smelters in China compared to 2 operating in the United States. This is but one example of what haunts the U.S. government and other Western governments, which is China's overwhelming domination of the mineral supply chains and the challenge of diversifying these supply chains and making them less dependent and more resilient. So that means— and that certainly applies to copper. So the US has 230 million metric tons of copper in reserves and resources underground waiting to be mined.

It remains actually— and people may not realize it— the second largest country in reserves and potential behind only Chile. Meeting these growing demands is fraught with challenges above and below ground. These challenges pertain to mining, recyclability, and processing. But even with these challenges, there are steps that we can take. There are policies that we can take, things that this committee is looking at to increase investment and innovation across the copper value chain.

First, accelerate mine development, and that requires reforms in permitting and judicial review. Absolutely critical. Second is to expand processing capacity. Third is to enhance recycling. And finally, the fourth is address the talent gap in mining and processing as the industry faces a wave of retirements and declining enrollment in technical programs.

These all focus on the, on the issue of China, of copper in the age of AI. Thank you for inviting me to testify, and I'd be pleased to take your questions. Thank you very much. Our next witness is Ms. Deborah Phillips. She is the president and CEO of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, and she is stationed in Arlington, Virginia.

Ms. Phillips, you are now recognized for 5 minutes. Thank you, Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Huffman, Subcommittee Chairman Stauber, Ranking Member Ansari, and members of the committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. I'm Deborah Phillips, the president and CEO of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, also known as NEMA. We represent more than 300 companies that manufacture essential electrical equipment.

Our industry contributes fully 1% of U.S. GDP. We directly employ half a million people in every state, and we support 2.2 million American jobs across the economy. We produce the technologies that generate, transmit, distribute, control electricity. NEMA members make it possible to power our homes, hospitals, factories, data centers, and other critical infrastructure. We are the manufacturers building the physical backbone of the modern energy system, and copper is fundamental to virtually every product we make.

There is no energy system without copper, and we're going to need significantly more of it to meet the demand that is growing at unprecedented rates. To meet this rising domestic demand, our members are expanding their U.S. operations. In fact, uh, since 2018, our members have invested over $200 billion in U.S. manufacturing with $100 billion more on the way. But to be successful at this scale, we have to have access to reliable, affordable supplies of copper. Why?

Because the United States is entering a new era of electricity demand growth. According to our recent published study focused on U.S. electricity demand— and this is distinct from Dr. Yergin's study, which looks at demand globally— we expect demand here in the U.S. to rise by 55% in 2050, and we expect data center electricity demand alone to increase by 300% between now and 2035. The electrification of buildings, industry, transportation systems are also significant drivers of new demand, and this outlook is not a distant theoretical scenario. It's underway today. Meeting this new era of electricity demand will require a major build-out of our physical infrastructure and the equipment our member companies make: transformers, switchgear, wiring cable, motors and drives, lighting solutions, industrial automation, and more.

Copper runs through this entire system. It's embedded across the infrastructure that moves energy molecules and electrons from extraction to production to the grid, from the grid to homes and factories, to new sources of demand like data centers and EVs. Copper is the common denominator to it all and the electrical products that power it. Copper in the trans— is in the transformers that step voltage up and down, the wire and cable that carry electricity over long distances into homes and businesses, the motors that power industrial operations, and the switchgear that controls electrical systems to keep them running safely and reliably. Copper is also fundamental to emerging sources of demand, as Dr. Juergens said, such as data centers and electric vehicles, as well as our homes and our offices that are increasingly smart and connected.

Our industry is working hard to manage copper supply chain risks, and smart public policy can help support our efforts. We support recent policy actions to expand U.S. access to critical minerals like copper. This includes adding copper to the U.S. Geological Survey's critical minerals list, as well as Subcommittee Chairman Stauber's Critical Mineral Dominance Act. We also support, support permitting reform, including transmission. It must include transmission from our view to reduce timelines for developing essential grid manufacturing and other critical infrastructure while maintaining important environmental protections.

We support Chairman Westermann's SPEED Act for this reason. Speed matters because demand is accelerating now. We also support efforts of members in both chambers who have put forward proposals to build grid capacity through grid-enhancing technologies with legislation such as the REWIRE Act and the High Capacity Grid Act. These policies would incentivize the technologies that will help us get more electrons out of our existing grid while we develop new generation. Finally, electrical manufacturers need predictable trade policy that aligns with our grid needs and our manufacturing ambitions.

The electrical industry's products are integral to these applications, and their affordability during this period of electric— electricity demand growth and rapid onshoring of manufacturing will keep costs down for consumers. Clearly, copper is not just another commodity. It's a strategic asset. And I'll close with this. Electricity demand is rising.

The technology exists to meet it. Manufacturers are investing, but materials like copper must be there. We urge Congress to work with manufacturers, miners, processors, and other key stakeholders in this room to strengthen domestic copper supply chains, accelerate responsible production, and ensure we have the materials needed to build at the scale this moment demands. Because if the United States is going to lead on energy, we must build. And to build, we must have copper.

Thank you. I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. Our next witness is Dr. Michelle Bustamante. She is a staff scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, and she is stationed in Washington, D.C. Dr. Bustamante, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

Thank you, Chair Stauber, Ranking Member Ansari, and subcommittee members. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Dr. Michelle Bustamante. As referenced, I'm a staff scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, where I lend my expertise from years of prior research as a sustainability scientist, including in large, large part on topics of, uh, at subject of today's hearing, like copper and material supply chains, toward our nonprofit mission of safeguarding the Earth, its people, its planets and animals, and the natural systems upon which all life depends. The title of today's hearing, as we all know, is Powering the 21st Century with American Copper.

In thinking about how to be most responsive to that question, I found myself having to address a more foundational question first, which is, which version of the 21st century are we talking about powering? Is it the committee's interest only to explore a status quo future that responds passively to present market trends? Or can we be bold enough to consider where we can actively work together to shape an intentional future in ways that better meet the needs of present-day communities and future generations while respecting natural systems in the process? The choice we make will matter enormously to the question at hand. Different development paths lead to very different outcomes for greenhouse gases, energy demand, manufacturing needs, and material use, including for copper.

Leading international scientific consensus makes clear that ambitious climate mitigation is a precondition for sustainable development, but it also shows us that how we decarbonize matters. As laid out in my more fulsome written testimony, even for pathways that are responsive to the massive challenge of mitigating climate change, Some pathways rely on very high resource and energy use, while others emphasize efficiency, demand-side measures, and circularity while still delivering high levels of human well-being. These differences have direct implications for copper and other raw material demand. Electrification at the center of virtually all Paris Agreement-consistent paths does increase copper needs, but importantly, the scale of that increase, as well as where, when, and under what conditions it's accessed, is still very much a result of choices that we can make today. And are not a foregone conclusion.

Managing energy demand through efficiency throughout the supply chain and expanding recycling can substantially reduce pressures on raw material extraction while still meeting climate and community goals. Under net-zero aligned scenarios, uh, most studies project copper demand rising, but by very different amounts depending on assumptions about energy demand growth, technology design, and recycling rates, and some even show potential for stabilization or decline long-term. Globally, only 17% of today— of the world's 27 million metric tons of refined copper is currently met by recycled materials, but studies show that that could increase to nearly 65 to 70% through improvements in collection and recycling infrastructure. Recent research from UC Davis shows that the number of new copper mines needed to meet this increased demand globally can also be reduced through aggressive recycling by over 30% relative to our reference case and 77% if trends in larger vehicle battery size and lower recycling rates are not addressed. For the United States, annual copper demand is currently 2.3 million tons, with roughly a quarter supplied by recycling.

US-specific modeling is limited, but available studies suggest demand may rise to about 3 to 4 million tons by 2050, again heavily dependent on technology choices, efficiency, and material recovery, which brings me to the role of American copper. Domestic copper production can rely— can play a role in supporting a clean energy transition. But only if pursued in ways that are consistent with the public interest. Mining and processing carry real risks to water resources, ecosystems, and communities. That means location, scale, and maintaining standards through opera— from operation all the way through end of life matter more, not less.

The United States already demonstrates that we need not just mine our way out of this. A balanced approach is possible. We produce significant copper domestically, rely on close allies for imports, use recycled content, and utilize environmental governance structures. Strengthening this balance is key. In practice, enhancing supply security is not only about opening new mines.

Addressing midstream gaps in processing and refining, expanding recycling capacity, and designing products for longer life and recovery can reduce the need for new extraction and improve resilience. Recycling in particular is a major opportunity, but recycling at scale requires policy. Standing standards for product design, investment in domestic infrastructure, and strong end-of-life collection systems. To conclude, concerns about copper supply are not meritless, but outcomes are not predetermined. And the people in this room have a great deal of agency to shape that demand, guide development, and set conditions that protect people and ecosystems while supporting the clean energy transition.

A sustainable 21st century powered by copper is not one defined by maximum extraction, It is one defined by responsible demand, high recycling and efficiency, strong environmental safeguards, and development that truly serves the public interest. Thank you. And I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you very much. Our final witness is Mr. Adam Estelle.

He is the president and CEO of the Copper Development Association, and he is stationed in McLean, Virginia. Mr. Estelle, you are now recognized for 5 minutes. Good morning, Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Huffman. Subcommittee Chairman Stauber and Ranking Member Ansari and other distinguished members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today about this topic of great importance to our country.

On behalf of Copper Development Association, which represents U.S. producers, fabricators, and wire and cable members, we are deeply grateful for the concerted efforts from the administration and bipartisan members of Congress for their support for our industry. In particular, I'd like to thank the bipartisan Copper Caucus. Today, we face a true Sputnik moment for American copper. As we've clearly established, copper is the indispensable metal of the modern era. Copper is the backbone of our electrical grid, our telecommunications systems, our water infrastructure, our buildings, our transportation, our defense industrial base, and more recently, data centers.

Every sector at the forefront of American strategic ambition runs on copper. And as demand for this red metal continues to grow, America has to adopt an all-of-the-above copper sourcing strategy to protect our national interests. This must involve increased domestic mining, increased domestic refining and processing, increased domestic recycling, as well as continued trade with dependable partners. None of these solutions on their own will be sufficient to meet demand. Domestic producers are galvanized and they're gearing up to produce not just more copper, but better copper that's produced responsibly and sustainably through robust third-party assurance frameworks like the Coppermark.

I'll now highlight some of the primary challenges and key segments of the copper supply chain and offer some pragmatic solutions that we believe will help ensure a resilient and reliable American copper industry for generations to come. Starting with mining, the United States sits atop a massive geological copper endowment estimated at 230 million metric tons. Yet domestic production has fallen dramatically over the last three decades. Driven by the following constraints, among others. First, permitting timelines for new U.S. mines routinely stretch well over a decade, far exceeding those in competing nations.

Second, U.S. copper ore grades are relatively lower than other regions, which puts domestic producers at a significant cost disadvantage versus international mines. And third, workforce pipelines are critically depleted. Without intervention, we will fall far short of what's necessary to support reindustrialization of domestic mining. Now, moving one step down in the copper supply chain, the erosion of U.S. copper smelting and refining capacity represents one of the most acute vulnerabilities to American copper. Consider that in 1976, America operated 16 primary copper smelters, and today only 2 remain in operation, with a third mothballed.

By contrast, China controls approximately 40% of global copper smelting capacity through massive state subsidies. China's overcapacity in copper smelting has created severe economic headwinds for our remaining smelters And it's also actively deterring new market entrants that see no business case in the current climate. We can change this landscape by passing H.R. 8277 To make copper eligible for the 45X Advanced Manufacturing Production Tax Credit for both primary and secondary refiners. We see this as mission critical and an easy win for all parties.

And secondly, our existing smelters require sustained financial support, permitting reform, and regulatory certainty to compete against Chinese dominance. Now, moving again further downstream, we must not forget about our critical midstream fabricators that transform copper raw materials into semi-finished products. This segment has suffered severe and sustained damage from decades of unfair trade, including dumping and state-sponsored overproduction, principally from China. In addition, China uses trade distorting practices to import massive volumes of high-quality copper scrap generated right here in the United States. That scrap is then processed and returned to the U.S. market as semi-finished or finished goods, often below market value, undermining domestic industry and American workers.

CDA's fabricator members therefore support following through on the domestic purchase requirement for high-quality copper scrap through precision-targeted export controls on 5 specific Schedule B codes. And secondly, advancing protections for downstream copper derivatives manufacturers to bring back the customer base for the midstream that was hollowed out by hyperglobalization and China's nonmarket practices. In closure, this is a true Sputnik moment for American copper, and a strong America simply cannot exist without a strong domestic copper industry. I want to thank you for your time, for the opportunity to testify today, and I look forward to your questions, answering them this morning or through written follow-up. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Just before we— before I start my questioning, We're going to have votes. We'll probably interrupt our conversation, you know, throughout the morning. So we're going to put forth a recess when time permits. The ranking member's is understandable.

We've got to get to the floor and vote and come back. But we're going to do this as quick as we can in between votes. So if we call a recess, it's because votes are ahead of us. So I'm going to now recognize members for 5 minutes of questioning. I'm going to now recognize myself for 5 minutes.

Dr. Juergen, your report notes that recycling can make an important contribution to our supply of copper, but additional copper mining will be necessary. Would you please elaborate on that? Thank you. I mean, sometimes people will just look at recycling as though you can take all the wiring out of this building and recycle it. But most of the copper that's being used today is being used productively.

So We do see a substantial possibility of increasing recycling, but we see it meeting about 25% of demand and that it's cumulative. You need more EVs out there and then at the end of their life, they'll get— there'll be the opportunity for recycling. But recycling does not obviate the need for considerable expansion of mining mineral supply. Thank you. Ms. Phillips, it's my understanding that the copper that is required to manufacture much of the equipment your members build must meet certain standards, standards that often cannot be met by recycled copper feedstocks.

Is that correct? Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question. Yes, that's correct. The, the, the copper that is required by the electrical industry has to abide by specific purity purity standards, which is typically above 99%. And so the scrap market does not always meet that standard.

It's challenging to get the copper to that level of purity. You know, we support research to get there and to improve those recycled supply chains, but what needs to come into our process has purity requirements that are a challenge right now to meet through recycled streams. So it's safe to say while copper recycling is an important part of our copper supply chain, this isn't just a problem we can recycle our way out of. In other words, we're going to mine more copper. Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

Dr. Juergen, the U.S. currently has 2 operating smelters. Mr. Estelle noted that China has 45. You've— in your testimony, you said it's more like 60. That's controlling over 40% of the world's copper processing. I point my colleagues across the aisle frequently make I share their concern and believe the solution is to develop more processing here in the United States.

Dr. Juergen, your report characterizes the economics of processing as increasingly precarious and that the geographic concentration amplifies systemic risk and exposes the supply chain to geopolitical shocks. Would you please discuss that further? Yes, the Chinese smelters are willing to operate at a loss basically because they have ancillary sources of revenue that result from it. And it does put our— and they also have very new facilities where they've modernized the most advanced technologies for smelting because so many of them are so new. It's quite dramatic how quickly they have come to dominate smelting.

And I think in terms of the US, it would— you know, there is this question, can we build in an expeditious way new processing facilities in this country, and also can we work with like-minded countries to see processing done in other countries too that would change this basic problem of over-reliance on China for all minerals, including copper, including copper processing. Thank you. Mr. Estelle, last year S&P reported that it takes an average of 19 19.1 years to bring a new mine into production. Would you please describe how permitting reform could reduce delays and increase predictability to improve investor confidence? Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Absolutely. We need permitting reform to get more copper online faster. So specifically, the delays can accelerate or expand project timelines.

We have multiagency review processes given the fact that most of the copper is on government land. So efforts to streamline that process would be extremely beneficial. First and foremost, foremost, foremost, clear timelines for NEPA environmental reviews. We understand that is one of the main bottlenecks. Second would be establishing a lead agency with all the agencies involved to help streamline it.

And third, encouraging concurrent review processes rather than sequentially. So those steps, as CDA supported on record Chairman Westerman's SPEED Act, would help address some of those issues. But permitting reform is absolutely critical to make this work. And then my last question here in my last 30 seconds, would the permitting reform bills the House Republicans have put forth this Congress, like the SPEED Act, the Permit Act, or the ESA Amendments Act, help narrow this 19.1-year timeline? Absolutely.

I believe so. We'd support any of those bills that would help without compromising responsible mining practices. Thank you very much. I will now recognize Representative Ansari, Ranking Member Ansari, for 5 minutes. Thank you, and thank you all so much for your testimony.

As we have heard, ensuring we have the copper we need here in the United States isn't just about mining. Without processing and manufacturing to turn copper ore into usable products, we're just digging ourselves into a bigger hole. But instead of building up these crucial parts of the copper supply chain, this administration is busy attacking one of the biggest drivers of new manufacturing manufacturing and mineral processing in the United States, which is clean energy. Ms. Phillips, would you agree that policies that drive up demand for American-made products that contain copper, like wind turbine batteries and transmission lines, are good for creating jobs in manufacturing? And a yes or no answer is fine.

We believe we need all— we need all sources of energy generation, including clean energy. Thank you. So we can assume that, you know, obviously the opposite is also true. Just this week, the administration illegally canceled two more offshore wind leases, paying off two additional companies to kill affordable, reliable energy products. That brings us to almost $2 billion in taxpayer money spent essentially as a bribe to keep clean energy off of the grid and keep American families paying more for fossil fuels.

These cancellations and Republicans' nonstop attacks on wind, solar, and battery storage across the United States are having very real impacts across the country, including the loss of over 39,000 good-paying jobs and over $29 billion of investment in clean energy manufacturing just last year. Instead, we must prioritize policies that will help us build more resilient supply chains, minimize the risk of copper shortages, build a clean energy economy with good jobs and economic growth and minimize environmental harm. Dr. Bustamante, would you be able to talk about some of the best practices for maximizing benefits for our economy and the environment and minimizing harms in end-to-end mineral supply chains? Yes, thank you for that excellent question. I really view this problem systemically, so one of the first things that we can do is try to look for solutions throughout the supply chain, including in managing the amount of extraction needed through smart use and efficiency, as well as innovation.

What we need by today's standards may not be what we actually need in the future. Focusing further on prioritizing sectors that drive down prices for Americans. So clean energy technologies are increasingly the most affordable sources of power, and we would like to see that. Strong regulations are something that I actually think are a benefit and are an essential part of minimizing these harms end to end. Community benefit agreements, for example, and strong permitting build trust with communities.

So this is something we want to see more of, not less. Thank you. We know that good industrial policy can deliver real benefits for Americans because we've seen it. So I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record this April 2026 report from the Roosevelt Institute called The Receipts: The Untold and Underappreciated Outcomes of Biden's Clean Energy Strategy. Without objection.

Together, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CHIPS Act, and the Science— CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act drove private investment and expanded industrial capacity across the country, raised wages, grew and grew our skilled industrial workforce, and built stronger projects with more public support through community benefit agreements. We don't have to accept a race to the bottom. Our minerals policy can and must deliver for all Americans. Dr. Bustamante, one more question for you. Can you tell us how strong regulations actually make us more secure and competitive?

Yes. So strong regulation is a way for us to actually see these projects go through without so much contention. And allow us to compete, uh, in responsibly in the global market. Um, having strong labor practices and being a leader in the global economy is something that would, uh, allow us to strengthen our position in the copper market, not weaken it. Thank you so much.

I yield back. Uh, thank you very much. As I alluded to, uh, we have votes called, uh, towards the end of the first vote, so At this moment, the chair will call a recess and we'll come back after votes. Thank you.

I am me! I'm not you! You're not him! He's not her! We're all different people!

You can see some parallels with that in another industry that happens to be central to my state of Idaho, with Idaho Nuclear, which is affiliated with Idaho National Lab. We do a lot of research there, and since we basically ignored or not paid attention to that industry since the 1980s. Our workforce and our supply chain has been very, very depleted. And so I— in, in that instance, there's a couple of things that are being focused on to try to improve it. One is the utilization of AI, and the other is, is trying to, to increase the utilization of robotics.

I want to just tee that up with you given your testimony in the arena of copper mining, copper processing, and see if any of that is being looked at within the industry and your commentary on that. Yes, thank you for your question. Absolutely. We see great promise and potential for artificial intelligence, automation, and other things to help advance our industry and also help attract the next generation of workforce that we need. And it's not just mining, right?

We need skilled labor at all segments of the supply chain, on the smelting, refining, processing side and midstream fabrication and also the recycling side as well. So as I look across our membership and the ways that they are innovating and applying AI in their own operations, copper is a high-tech industry. And I think the next generation workforce needs to appreciate that and that this is opening up all sorts of new and exciting jobs and career pathways in copper. That should be exciting. So we have to tell that story.

And I think there's a lot of potential for those tools to help attract the talent to our workforce that we desperately need right now. Monsieur— Miss Phillips, from the manufacturing standpoint, what do you think on that topic? What's— what's the— what are the pinch points with your workforce and supply chain needs? Thank you. Thank you for the question.

Yes, labor, skilled labor across the entire electrical supply chain is key, a key constraint to growth for our industry as well. We're down about 15,000 jobs in the transformer supply chain. It's one of the reasons why we've got lengthy lead times for transformers. We just can't run second and third shifts. So we face some of the same labor constraints as the mining industry.

We're very focused on that. There's some pieces of legislation that help. The VET Act establishes glide paths for veterans to come into to the energy industry. This administration has focused on America's Talent Strategy, on growing apprenticeships. It's very important for the electrical and energy industry as a whole.

But we face those same constraints, but also, like Mr. Estelle mentioned, see the promise of industrial automation and robotics technologies to help us bridge those gaps. Thank you for that. Mr. Estelle, back to you. Another thing you mentioned in your testimony had to do with how the smelters and the processing had been so, so reduced in the U.S. and how in China, just the reverse, they have turned up the capacity. What do you know about the, say, a Chinese smelter, for example?

How would, would one of those or that operation be looked upon, or how would that rank and file within our EPA standards if they were subject to the same standards that we have here in the U.S.?

Thank you for your question. I don't know the particulars of the specific technology used in Chinese smelters, but obviously they made a decision decades ago to build out processing capacity at scale when it didn't make economic sense. And meanwhile, the West did not do that for very rational market-driven decisions. Right. And now we're facing the challenges of trying to build that back.

That's why solutions like the 45X tax credit are so critical, because that's the principal financial tool we have to make expanded smelting and refining capacity economically viable in this country. Ms. Phillips, do you have any insight on how a— we only have about 20 seconds— but how a Chinese smelter might look environmentally in the US? No, unfortunately we're not the smelting industry, but I can tell you that we've got some of the strongest environmental statutes in this, in this country. And so, um, you know, I have full confidence that, that our operations are operating at, at those optimized levels in terms of environmental protections as compared to China. Great, thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I yield back. Thank you very much. The chair recognizes Representative Grijalva for 5 minutes. Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I'd like to begin by welcoming the members of Apache Stronghold, a nonprofit coalition of Apache people and allies dedicated to protecting Oak Oak Flat and building civic engagement. Among them is Dr. Wensler Noci Sr., founder and director of Apache Stronghold, former chairman of the San Carlos Apache Tribe, and former council member for the Peridot District. For decades, Dr. Noci has been at the forefront of the effort to protect Oak Flat, a site that is not only historically significant but spiritually indispensable to the Apache people. Through his leadership, Apache Stronghold has organized prayer gatherings, runs, and national advocacy campaigns to defend Oak Flat from destruction.

He has worked tirelessly to elevate this issue beyond a local dispute, framing it as a fundamental question of religious freedom, human rights, and the federal government's responsibility to honor and trust tribal nations. Apache Strongholds has brought this fight to every level, engaging federal agencies and testifying before Congress, to leading legal challenges, ensuring tribal voices are heard and cultural and spiritual significance of this land is recognized. Thank you to all of you for being here. We deeply appreciate your presence and your continued advocacy. Dr. Noce and Apache Stronghold work— their work underscores what is at stake in this broader conversation.

Nearly 90% of U.S. copper reserves and resources are located within 35 miles of tribal lands. What this means is almost Every new copper mine in this country will in some way affect tribal cultural sites, water resources, and air quality. Copper is undeniably important to modern society, but its importance does not outweigh concerns about cultural survival, environmental protection, and tribal rights. Now, nowhere is this tension more clearer than in Oak Flat, Arizona, the site of the proposed Resolution Copper Mine. Just last month, the Forest Service completed a land transfer, handing over federal land to the mining company despite longstanding opposition.

It's important to be clear about what Resolution Copper represents. It is a joint venture between two of the world's largest foreign-owned mining corporations, Rio Tinto and BHP, formed to acquire public land at Oak Flat, extract American copper, and send much of it overseas, primarily to China. Even with this land transfer, the fight is far from over. That's why I introduced H.R. 7957 To protect the remaining areas of the Tonto National Forest to ensure tribal communities can continue accessing lands that have used traditional practices since time immemorial.

This is just one of the fights we'll continue to have if we don't fundamentally reform the mining law of 1872. I ask for unanimous consent to enter into the record these testimonials from Chairman Rambler of the San Carlos Apache Tribe and Dr. Winslow Noce of Apache Stronghold. Without objection. Thank you. Dr. Juergen, I'm confident that Resolution Copper is part of your 29 mine development statistic, and there is good reason that this mine has been contested for so long.

It will permanently destroy sacred site of O'odham, and I stand with the tribe in opposing it. I'd like to direct my questions to Dr. Bustamante. Dr. Bustamante, in your testimony you talk about smart mining siting, which includes avoiding sacred, sensitive, and special places. Can you expand on why that is so essential for the 21st century? Yes, I can, and thank you for the question.

Um, so this type of conflict is actually exactly what we're hoping to avoid with better development process, a more thoughtful process from the start. This is really what we're advocating for in thinking about in advance where are the places that are most appropriate to mine. And we have to do better. There's a bad history of development in this country. So I think that it's just— it is essential because if we want to see our ability to meet these challenges, we have to think about it up front.

We have to do better. And I think we can. Can you expand on how efficiencies and efforts like improved recycling capacity can help us reduce the need for new mines in the first place? Yes. So it— I mentioned a specific study recently that has looked into that effect and demonstrated it quite powerfully from UC Davis.

And we were able to see that under scenarios where there's aggressive recycling throughout the supply chain, it's very important that we understand recycling needs to happen not just with clean technologies, but with our legacy applications as well in buildings, that we were able to see an over 30% reduction in the number of mines that would need to be opened through 2050. And this is, you know, we're talking about dozens of real places, real sites, people. So it matters. Thank you. I yield back.

Thank you. Representative Eazel, you're up for 5 minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before I begin my questions, I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from Southern Company supporting today's hearing. So moved.

Without objection. The letter states, as electricity demand increases and utilities undertake significant investments to support economic growth and new technologies and system resilience, copper availability has become an increasingly strategic concern for our industry. This letter demonstrates a major concern among industry for the copper shortfall that is predicted in S&P's Global Copper in the Age of AI Challenges of Electrician report.

In Mississippi, a reliable electric grid isn't just important, it's essential. Much of our state is rural, and while our electric cooperatives serve nearly 2 million Mississippians across tens of thousands of miles of line, We also rely on investor-owned utilities like Mississippi Power, part of the, uh, Southern Company system, to keep energy flowing, especially along the Gulf Coast where we're seeing continued growth. And in my state, this isn't just about day-to-day demand. It's about being ready when things go wrong. We've seen firsthand, uh, what happens during hurricanes and severe storms along the Gulf Coast.

When the power goes out, folks aren't worried about supply chains. They're counting on power to be restored quickly. That only happens if utilities have timely access to the materials and equipment they need. Ms. Phillips, I've heard from utilities serving regions like mine that they're beginning to see real strain in the copper-dependent supply chains, especially when it comes to critical equipment from— like transformers. They're dealing with longer lead times and more uncertainty just trying to get materials needed to maintain, rebuild, and strengthen the grid.

From your perspective, what kinds of delays and procurement challenges are your member companies seeing right now, and how is it impacting the ability to deliver equipment, especially in moments of need like storm recovery? Thank you very much for the question, Congressman. Our industry, of course, is not the utility industry, but we serve it with critical equipment—transformers, switchgear, wire and cable. And unfortunately, we're dealing with an aging grid, an aging grid that requires investment, whether that's grid-enhancing technologies, reconductoring, demand response technologies behind the meter, because we've got unprecedented growth in electricity demand and we see it you know, as far out as 2050. So these supply chains that are serving the grid as we're, you know, doing that buildout and enhancing the grid are strained.

I already talked about the labor constraints. We're constrained by materials like critical minerals, copper included, as well as electrical steel. So these issues matter. Right now, our industry sources most of our copper here domestically. Domestically, as well as from Chile, Peru, Mexico, Canada.

However, enhancing our own supply here in this country across the entire copper supply chain will help us and give us the confidence to meet those— the demand curve that's coming and the price shifting that we could expect in the future. Thank you. And as those challenges continue, I understand many of these utility contracts are tied to the price of copper. So when copper prices rise, then costs move quickly through the system. For rural states like Mississippi, where infrastructure costs are already higher per customer, what does that mean for affordability?

And how could these supply chain pressures ultimately impact what families and small businesses are paying for electricity? Yes, that's true. Many contracts that our members have with, with utilities are indexed. On commodities like copper, sometimes electrical steel, other critical minerals, because these contracts are— tend to be years long in duration. So there could be price fluctuations during the duration of those contracts.

So the indexing is a real issue. If prices go up, prices go down, the contract costs also float. So having more domestic supply of all of these critical grid materials, critical minerals, copper, electrical steel, transformers, you know, chips and semiconductors are very important in these applications as well. Buffers us against those price fluctuations. Thank you, Ms. Phillips.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentlemen, would you yield your balance of your time to me? Yes, I will. Go for it. So, um, we know that there's this grand battle that's going on on a global scale in China seeking world hegemony.

They want to dominate the world. We all know that at this point, if we have our eyes open. And I want to address a question to you, Mr. Yergin, knowing that this is going on and you speak about it, this concentration of refining power for copper that China has. Talk about the leverage that they get as a result of them having this capability that is waning in the United States. America?

Well, we saw already what that meant in terms of rare earths, that where they had a 90% domination, this is a 40-50% domination, uh, likely to continue to grow given the track that we have been on. And simply, you know, there's a recognition that we— that have supply chains that are that dependent upon that country, when there are the unresolved questions and the tensions between the two, we've already had a demonstration of what that means. So That gives an additional urgency to this whole question of diversifying the supply chains and making the US supply system more resilient. I yield. The gentleman yields back.

Chair now recognizes Mr. Magaziner for 5 minutes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I'm glad that I have colleagues on both sides of the aisle and witnesses who agree on the importance of securing a strong supply chain for copper. Copper is essential for powering our economy. It's in our phones, our vehicles, our homes, and it's needed to keep electricity flowing.

Global demand for copper is expected to rise 22% over the next decade, and the United States has a lot of work to do if we are going to make our supply chain more resilient. So I'm interested in learning more from our witnesses today. I'll start with Dr. Bustamante. My understanding is that recycled copper currently counts for about a third of US supply. What do we need to do, or what can be done to increase our recycling capacity for copper so that we can at least in part meet more of our demand that way?

Thank you for the question. My understanding is that this is really more of an issue of collection and setting up, having the necessary capacity to actually do the processing and recycling in the United States than it is a technology issue. So we need to start thinking now about how to really develop a strong and well-thought-out recycling infrastructure in the United States. We need a strategy. We need a strategy to, as you say, to build out the capacity and also to educate people and encourage people to recycle.

Are there any— and I'll ask any of our witnesses, you know, if they'd like to weigh in on this point. I'm also curious if there are any lessons that we can learn from other countries that are even more resource-constrained about effective strategies for recycling, if anyone would like to weigh in. Sir? I'll jump in. Thank you for the question.

I think the recycling capacity is critically important. We also have to remember the significant lag time before the copper becomes available for recycling. Meanwhile, demand has increased almost exponentially, and we have these copper products that are in active service for decades. So even if we build out all this capacity domestically, it's still got to be all of the above— mining, recycling, and continued trade. I would like to spotlight the resurgence of America's secondary copper smelting industry.

Around the turn of the century, we didn't have secondary smelters in this country, and now we've seen new investments whether that's Veland Shelbyville in Kentucky, Ames Copper Group in North Carolina, Arubus Richmond in Georgia. They're all investing in these advanced capabilities to recycle more here, more end-of-life products rather than exporting it. But we have to protect those investments. That's why we're calling for precision-targeted export controls to counter some of China's predatory practices to take the feedstock. Yeah, I want to build on that.

And, and again, any of our witnesses can weigh in on any of this, but You know, my understanding is that due to the lack of smelting capacity, a lot of what we mine, in addition to what we recycle, gets sent to China and is processed there. And so part of the equation here has to be responsibly looking at strategies to expand our own capacity to do this. What are the keys to getting that right and doing it in a way that is also environmentally responsible? Again, I'll ask anyone to weigh in.

You know, again, I think the key is to make it economically viable. That's where the 45X tax credit can help. And if we can make it viable, we'll do it here under the highest standards in the world— environmentally, labor, all of it. So it's important to make the economic case for it so we can do it with the highest standards here. And Dr.

Bustamante, do you have a point of view on what are the sort of key environmental mitigation components of this that we need to be mindful of?

Uh, not super specifically, but I think the— anytime we're dealing with smelting activities, we're concerned about air emissions, water emissions, energy use. And I think that enforcing the existing laws that we have on the book, keeping those strong, is really critical. Thank you. And with the remaining time I have left, I just want to remind my colleagues, you know, there's been a lot of talk here about our competition with China, and rightfully so. I would just note for the record that China is also outcompeting us right now in the development of renewable energy— solar, wind.

They are exponentially growing faster than we are. The deployment of electric vehicles— China is way ahead of us. And so when we talk about needing to compete, that means across the board. And we shouldn't be, you know, kneecapping our own industry here in the United States when it comes to clean energy, when China and our other adversaries are continuing to go full steam ahead. So with that, I yield back.

Thank you very much. The chair now recognizes Representative Tiffany from Wisconsin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I would add that to the point that was just made, that Nuclear and coal plants are being built apace in China also. Ms. Bustamante, you said that— in reading your testimony, I understand that you said that like the other panelists, recycling cannot meet the demand.

Is that correct? That's correct. No single solution can solve the problem. It's essential and it will help us reduce the amount we have to do more harmful activities. How many pounds of copper in a wind turbine?

I don't have that off the top of my head. Several kilograms. So previously I'd been told it was 7,000. I see my staff says it's between 8,000 and 10,000 pounds of copper in a single wind turbine. And so if we do this conversion that you're advocating for, NRDC, your organization, is saying we need to have this conversion to wind and solar, correct?

Yes. Are you willing to sacrifice American farmland as we are seeing in my state of Wisconsin? Tens of thousands of acres of some of the most beautiful farmland you will find in the world is now being converted to wind and solar. Is that a good public policy choice?

I think that deploying, you know, clean and safe energy for America is a good policy choice. Policy. I think that the responsible siting of renewables is equally as important as siting of things like mining. Is it, is it clean when, when many of those wind turbines and solar panels are coming from China where they have much lower environmental standards? I mean, when you look at the entire life cycle, including disposing of these, where people don't— they're having a great struggle at this point disposing of wind turbine blades.

I mean, are we actually— when you look at the entire life cycle, are we actually making the right choice there? And add into that a $50,000 an acre subsidy to convert farmland. Well, I appreciate the life cycle thinking question. I would say that it is cleaner on the whole compared to the alternatives that it's replacing. Where do you have a life cycle, um, analysis that shows that?

Do you have a life cycle data to support that? I would be happy to submit something for the record. Um, where in the United States do you believe we should mine copper? So it's acknowledged, I think, generally that we need to, um, uh, that we need new sources of copper that will be mined. Where in the United States has NRDC proposed that we can mine copper where there's an existing deposit?

Well, NRDC is not the arbiter of where all mining happens, but we are interested in exploring these questions through research and currently are doing that, looking to identify what places have the most sensitivities, how those map onto existing deposits, mines we expect to open. Isn't that why we have the permitting process, is to make sure that we located in those places that is best. Actually, it's my understanding, uh, that the permitting process is to review the proposed project, not to consider alternative locations. So we hear this consistently from minority witnesses that have come before this committee, um, throughout this session of Congress, where they're like, yes, we believe there should be more mining in the United States of America. But when I ask them where— name a place where we should mine here in America, They can never point to a place where we should mine in America, having these enormous deposits that we have.

And isn't it, isn't it true, Mr. Estelle, that we have enormous amounts of minerals that with significant deposits here in America to be able to provide for all of our mineral needs, not just copper? Absolutely. As Dr. Juergen testified, 230 million metric tons reserves and resources. Consider the urban mine as well. All this copper in the use phase that eventually will come back for recycling, estimated around 85 million metric tons, I believe.

Does the United States have among the best laws, in other words, the most stringent laws in regards to mining to make sure that we limit environmental damage? Yes, we have among the highest standards in the world environmentally, for labor laws. I also like to point out the industry's strong commitment to third-party assurance frameworks like the CopperMark. That have rigorous criteria, due diligence standards, third-party verification, all in alignment with the UN SDGs. Yeah, it's an incredible—.

I mean, when you look at the chart of what we have to go through in America, it's incredible. One final quick question. We hear this thing about foreign ownership. Isn't there— isn't it logical that you're not going to have domestic mine operators or owners here in the United States when you have a system that discourages it from happening and therefore We have to go to foreign ownership in order to make it happen. Absolutely.

Final word. It's a strong deterrent. I yield back. Thank you. Before I go to Representative Rivas, I do want to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record letters of support from 12 organizations working across the entire copper supply chain, ranging from upstream mining for copper ore to end users of the products and technologies we use every day in support of today's hearing.

These letters emphasize how sufficient, reliable, and affordable domestic production of copper will be vital for national economic security. And copper is essential to electrification, and therefore it underlies the United States' ability to build and maintain critical infrastructure, advanced technologies, and security systems, meet our energy demands, and lead the world in the AI race. Without objection. Representative Rivas, you're up for 5 minutes. Thank you, Mr.

Chair, for recognizing me. Before I go into my comments, I want to respond, uh, to Mr. Tiffany. Having the best environmental standards, like you said, that we do in the world, uh, means that we have to keep them strong here in the United States. And, uh, my short time on this committee, I've seen the gutting of a lot of, uh, the strongest protections in terms of environmental standards that have happened under this majority. Uh, and so I just want to, uh, emphasize that in order for that to happen, we need to— this committee, um, in this House, we need to make sure that we keep those standards strong.

Then, uh, but copper wire theft, um, is causing public safety issues in neighborhoods in my district and a financial strain across the city of Los Angeles. Uh, my district has seen, um, brazen and dangerous attempts, uh, to steal copper wires from streetlights and power lines. Copper theft has left neighborhoods without working streetlights and landlines being rendered useless for emergency responders and constituents who rely on them. In 2019, the city of Los Angeles reported over 20,000 requests for streetlight repairs, In 2024, the city received over 45,000 requests for these same streetlight repairs. Uh, for fiscal year 2027, I submitted a community funding project request to install anti-copper wire theft measures for city lighting infrastructure in my district, and this project would improve public safety and reduce future maintenance, maintenance costs.

However, Congress must address the root cause of these thefts, which is the black market demand for copper. I ask for unanimous consent to enter a story from KABC 7 broadcast from November 21st, 2025, entitled 7 on Your Side Digs Into Where Stolen Copper Wire Actually Ends Up. Without objection. Thank you. This illegal copper black market incentivizes bad actors to buy copper in bulk and ship it to China, where it gets repurposed for new copper wire that Americans end up purchasing again.

This cycle leads to increased costs for communities across the country. And, you know, so far the solution from the majority seems to be to continue mining without any regards for the local community, waterways, or the environment. This method does not solve the black market cycle. It accelerates it. Instead of mining more, Congress must strengthen our domestic copper recycling system.

Improving our domestic copper recycling system through proven circular strategies such as e-recycling and extracting post-consumer copper scrap. We need to find ways to increase legal, above-board recycling. This will increase the copper supply, lower the cost burden on working families, create jobs, and improve public safety. Dr. Bustamante, can you point to any examples, systems, or strategies that other countries have set up to create a strong copper collection and recycling system?

Thank you for that question. I think that globally we still have a long way to go. We all have a lot we can learn, but my understanding is that the European Union has many regulations that are really leading the way in terms of setting up more requirements, standards for recycled content. And waste management export strategies. So there's significant amount that we can look to from places like the European Union and otherwise.

Okay. Thank you. Do you think that these examples will help address the issues of the black market?

It's an interesting question. I think expanding our formal domestic recycling system in the country could potentially produce some helpful indirect forces, namely through increasing streams of secondary copper, uh, from legitimate sources, and, uh, hopefully mitigating record-high prices and reducing therefore the incentive to pursue these illicit pathways. But it is also essential that actors in the system are held accountable to and supported in setting up transparent sourcing records to ensure that they have knowledge and provenance of where that is coming from. Okay. Thank you.

By strengthening our copper recycling, our communities will be able to address the copper black market and ensure neighborhoods are bright and safe. Thank you. And I yield back. Representative Rivas, can I have your last 10 seconds?

Thank you. I appreciate the fact that you're looking at copper theft because it is real. I think that we have to have a strict prosecution as well, not just coming and going. When you get caught stealing copper, you should be held to the full extent of the law. And that's just not in your state.

That's across the country. So thank you for bringing that up. The chair now recognizes Representative Kennedy for 5 minutes. Thank you, Chairman Stauber and Ranking Member Ansari, for convening today's hearing. And thank you to our witnesses for being here to speak to the critical importance of copper.

I do, Mr. Chair, ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from the Utah Mining Association supporting today's hearing. Without objection. The letter states, quote, our state has a long history of responsible mineral development, a skilled workforce, established mining industry, and policymakers who increasingly recognize that minerals such as copper are foundational to modern energy systems, manufacturing, and national security. Utah has long held a position as the second largest producer of copper in the United States.

Utah's copper producers demonstrate the diversity of projects and operating models that can contribute to the domestic supply chain, end quote. Utah stands ready to be part of the solution to this looming copper shortfall. This letter describes how Utah offers tangible examples of how domestic copper production can be increased in support of natural and national priorities.

Utah's state motto is a single word: industry. It says a lot about who we are. For over a century, Utah stood at the center of American industry, and that includes the copper story. The Kennecott Copper Mine has been running for more than 100 years and is one of the most productive and reliable sources of copper in the country. In my district, the newly operational Copper One mine, the world's first fully autonomous mine, is a sign not just of production strength but of Utah's innovation and leadership.

But this is not just about Utah, it's about America's ability to build, to innovate, and to defend itself. Copper is foundational to everything from energy infrastructure and advanced manufacturing to defense systems and next generation technologies. Simply put, without copper, there is no modern economy. If we're serious about energy security, economic resilience, and maintaining our global competitive edge, then we must be serious about copper. Mr. Estelle, I have several questions for you if we get an opportunity to do that.

Thanks for being here. At the end of your testimony, you included this graph, which I enlarged and is behind me at this point so we could all see it. Clearly, the US was producing more refined copper than China in the past, but something changed on our end to allow them to take over the industry. What can we as a committee do to bring back domestic copper refining, loosen China's grip on the supply chain? Thank you for your question.

It's a very sobering chart and quite alarming, frankly. And I think as a country, we failed that segment of the value-added copper supply chain and allowed it to wither on the vine. The numbers speak for themselves. 16 Smelters in 1996, whenever it was, 2 operational today, 1 standing idle today that we can't get back online. So we have to fix that.

That's why I've called this the Sputnik moment. We have to catch up. So the primary tools are the 45X Advanced Production Manufacturing Tax Credit, which would help not only primary refining but also secondary refining as well. And on top of that, we need the permitting reform, we need the regulatory certainty, the sustained financial support, and we need the workforce. So we've got a multifaceted challenge here, but we absolutely have to prioritize processing in this country because we can open these mines.

But if we can't process it here, economically under the highest standards in the world, then we'll have to export. Thank you for emphasizing those points. Utah has long been the second largest copper-producing state in the country and is home to one of the only three remaining copper smelters at Rio Tinto Kennecott. From your perspective, Mr. Estelle, what specific federal policies would most immediately help Utah operations like Kennecott increase throughput at existing mines and smelting facilities so we can keep more U.S. mine concentrate here at home instead of exporting it to foreign countries, and especially China. Yes, 45X.

There's a bill that's been introduced, HR 8277, would accomplish that, as well as the permitting reform, regulatory certainty, and workforce support. Excellent emphasis on those important points. The hearing memo highlights the recent restart of Utah's Mariana Copper One mine in my district, which is using end-to-end autonomous operations and blending mined ore scrap feedstock to boost output and efficiency. What can federal agencies and Congress do to replicate and scale this Utah model of autonomy first and flexible processing at other U.S. copper projects? And are there specific permitting or regulatory barriers that are holding back similar innovation?

Yes, quite possibly. We absolutely have to embrace innovation and technology advancement. So we've called for support for federal grants that can help drive that, to help replicate some of these innovative solutions that we're seeing in Utah and elsewhere to scale it. Thank you. And this year, just to point out something that my state legislative colleagues have enacted, Senate Bill 254 creates a Critical Minerals Council, critical minerals zones with accelerated permitting, and the Mines Center to validate processing technologies at industrial scale.

What changes at the federal level, for example, permitting, tax policy, or R&D support, would best complement Utah's approach so that our state can serve as a national hub for copper and critical mineral processing rather than seeing those investments flow to countries like China? Yes, that's why we need solutions for permitting reform. Absolutely. Chairman Westerman's SPEED Act would certainly help that. Definitive timelines more than anything, concurrent review periods, a lead federal agency— those are all solutions that would help accelerate that and relieve the primary bottleneck.

I think every question that I've asked is answered in your circumstance in the same way. We just need to get moving. And frankly, we are moving on the House side. There's another body that we are dependent on as well to get these things done. My last question with the remaining time that I have is, as Congress considers national copper policy, what steps should we take to ensure rural mining counties in Utah and elsewhere have the workforce development infrastructure and long-term regulatory certainty that they need so that copper remains an engine of local prosperity instead of a bottleneck to economic economic growth.

We have to lift up these communities and where copper operations can anchor the local economy so we can create jobs and again, do it with the highest standards in the world. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for that time. And I yield back.

Thank you very much. Before we go to Representative Gosar, he should be here very shortly. I do want to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record, submit letters of support from Representative Begich from the Alaska Miners and Representative Downing from the Montana mining. And without objection, so ordered. We're going to take a 30-second recess.

I want to give Representative Gosa— we're giving him an opportunity to question, and he's on his way, we figure, within a minute or so. So 30-second recess, or maybe a minute. Thank you.

Any idea?

All right, we're going to come back from recess. I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable testimony and the members for their questions. The members of the subcommittee may have some additional questions for the witness, and we will ask you to respond to these in writing. Under Committee Rule 3A, members of the subcommittee must submit questions to the subcommittee clerk by 5 p.m. on Monday, May 4th. The hearing record will be open for 10 business days for these responses.

If there's no further business, without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. Thank you.