Minnesota has committed to 100% carbon-free electricity by 2040. Reaching that goal will require enormous investments in electricity generation, transmission, energy storage and new technology.
But there is a contradiction we need to confront:
You cannot build a clean-energy future without minerals.
Copper is essential for transmission lines, transformers, electrical wiring and electric systems. Nickel, cobalt and platinum-group metals are important for batteries and advanced technologies. These minerals are also used in computers, telecommunications, medical equipment and manufacturing.
Yet Minnesota continues to make it harder to develop the very resources needed to build our energy future.
The Governor’s action targets new nonferrous mining in the Rainy River Headwaters watershed, including the area of the proposed Twin Metals project near Ely and Babbitt. The Duluth Complex contains copper, nickel, cobalt and platinum-group metals—the same resources increasingly important to America’s energy and national security.
This matters tremendously to communities across northeastern Minnesota. Ely, Babbitt, Two Harbors, Silver Bay and our surrounding communities need strong, sustainable economic opportunities. Responsible mineral development can provide high-paying jobs in mining, engineering, construction, transportation, manufacturing and the many businesses supporting those industries.
We can protect our water and responsibly develop Minnesota’s resources. Mining projects should undergo rigorous environmental review and permitting and be required to meet Minnesota’s high standards. We should evaluate projects based on science and whether they can meet those standards rather than deciding before the process begins that these resources can never be developed.
If Minnesota refuses to develop critical minerals, demand doesn’t disappear. We simply import them. That means mining jobs, investment and economic opportunity go somewhere else—potentially to countries with environmental and labor standards far below Minnesota’s. Then we ship those minerals thousands of miles, manufacture products elsewhere and buy them back.
That isn’t a cleaner environmental policy. It is outsourcing the environmental impact and the jobs.
Minnesota has more than a century of mining history. We know how important our natural resources are to the communities, families and businesses of northern Minnesota. New mining technologies and strong environmental standards should allow us to build upon that history responsibly.
There is also a direct connection to what families care about every day: affordable energy.
Minnesota’s 2040 energy transition will require significant upgrades to transmission lines, transformers and the electric grid. Those projects require enormous amounts of copper and other minerals. If Minnesota is going to require this transition, we should be asking where those materials will come from and what policies will keep electricity reliable and affordable.
When I talk with people throughout our communities, I hear the same concern: families want more money left in their wallets after paying their monthly bills. Energy policy must recognize affordability and reliability alongside environmental goals.
We should be asking a straightforward question:
Why send Minnesota jobs and resources overseas, only to buy the finished products back?
Let’s responsibly develop Minnesota’s resources, strengthen American supply chains, create high-paying Minnesota jobs and use the resources beneath our feet to help build Minnesota’s energy future.
We can protect our environment, support our communities and build an affordable, reliable energy future right here at home.
Natalie Zeleznikar
