⚡NIMITZ TECH NEWS FLASH⚡

“Full Blast: Contrasting Momentum in the Space Mining Economy to the Terrestrial Mining Regulatory Morass”

House Committee on Natural Resources, Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee

February 25, 2025 (recording linked here)

HEARING INFORMATION

Witnesses and Written Testimony (linked):

• Mr. Misael Cabrera: Director, Professor of Practice, School of Mining and Mineral Resources, The University of Arizona

• Mr. Steven Place: Senior Policy Advisor, AstroForge

• Mr. Saurav Shroff: CEO, Starpath 

• Mr. Richard Painter: Professor of Corporate Law, University of Minnesota Law School 

HEARING HIGHLIGHTS

IN THEIR WORDS

SUMMARY OF OPENING STATEMENTS FROM THE COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE

• Chairman Gosar welcomed everyone and thanked the witnesses for testifying on the issue of space mining and its contrast with the terrestrial mining regulatory framework. He highlighted that, under the previous administration, the U.S. prioritized resource development, while the current administration’s regulatory policies have hindered domestic mining. He emphasized that the United States must reduce its reliance on China for critical minerals and take advantage of opportunities in space resource extraction. He pointed to the rapid progress of the space mining industry and the potential for American companies to establish mineral supply chains in space, stressing the need for permitting reform and continued innovation.

• Ranking member Dexter questioned the necessity of space mining at this time, arguing that the U.S. already has sufficient resources through recycling, redesign, and strategic partnerships. She criticized the majority for seeking billions in taxpayer dollars for an endeavor she deemed unnecessary, particularly while cutting essential government programs. She also raised concerns about conflicts of interest, specifically pointing to Elon Musk’s increasing influence over government decisions and regulatory agencies. She argued that Musk’s actions, including layoffs and federal contract acquisitions, posed risks to workers, national security, and public oversight.

• Ranking member Huffman mocked the premise of the hearing, calling it out of touch with pressing national concerns. He criticized House Republicans for prioritizing space mining over real oversight, especially amid significant government layoffs and budget cuts. He argued that the hearing served as a promotional opportunity for private companies, particularly those with ties to Musk, who has benefited significantly from federal contracts. He raised ethical concerns over Musk’s access to sensitive government data and accused Republicans of using the hearing as an excuse to attack environmental regulations while ignoring larger accountability issues.

SUMMARY OF WITNESS STATEMENT

• Professor Cabrera argued that space mining was not just a futuristic concept but a crucial step toward deep-space exploration and an alternative to the regulatory and social obstacles faced by terrestrial mining. He highlighted the University of Arizona’s leadership in space research and mining innovation, citing the OSIRIS-REx mission as proof that asteroid mining is technologically feasible, though not yet economically viable. He stressed that innovation in Earth mining must advance alongside space mining, calling for regulatory reform to streamline the federal permitting process and reduce judicial delays that hinder domestic mineral extraction.

• Mr. Place announced the imminent launch of the first privately funded deep-space mining mission. He emphasized the strategic importance of asteroid mining in securing critical minerals, particularly platinum-group metals, as the U.S. relies heavily on foreign sources, including China and Russia. He described Astro Forge’s step-by-step approach to developing space mining technology, with missions planned through 2026 to confirm asteroid compositions, land on asteroids, and eventually refine and transport mined materials back to Earth. He proposed five policy recommendations, including establishing a space resource consortium, underwriting a price floor for space minerals, expanding Department of Energy loans to space mining, increasing NASA collaboration with commercial space companies, and providing easier access to NASA’s Deep Space Network for communications.

• Mr. Painter acknowledged the potential economic benefits of space mining but warned against using taxpayer money without proper oversight. He stressed that those assuming financial risks—whether private investors or the government—should receive fair returns based on the level of risk taken. He raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest in government decisions on space mining, emphasizing the need for transparency and adherence to financial disclosure laws. He warned that appointing special government employees without clear financial disclosures undermined public trust and accountability, especially given the nation’s budget constraints and recent government service cutbacks.

• Mr. Schroff framed space mining as a critical enabler of affordable Moon and Mars travel, predicting a future where space transport operates as routinely as airline travel. He highlighted SpaceX’s advancements in reusable rockets and stressed that refueling stations on the Moon and Mars were essential for deep-space missions. He warned that China was aggressively advancing its space mining capabilities, having recently collected samples from a resource-rich area of the Moon while the U.S. canceled its own lunar mission. To maintain leadership, he urged faster FAA launch approvals, alignment of NASA funding with administration goals, and modernization of planetary protection regulations, arguing that outdated policies could hinder U.S. dominance in space resource extraction.

SUMMARY OF Q and A

• Rep. Collins asked Mr. Painter if he had any technical expertise in modern mining practices and technologies, to which Mr. Painter replied that he did not, as his expertise was in government ethics. Rep. Collins then asked if Mr. Painter taught courses on mining law or policy, and Mr. Painter reiterated that he did not. Rep. Collins pressed further, noting that Mr. Painter had publicly opposed hard rock mining projects while supporting the expansion of the solar industry, and Mr. Painter responded that he supported mining but was critical of companies that failed to ensure environmental cleanup. When Rep. Collins questioned whether Mr. Painter acknowledged that solar energy required critical minerals, Mr. Painter agreed but insisted that mining operations must be held to high environmental and labor standards. Rep. Collins accused Mr. Painter of advancing an anti-mining agenda, and Mr. Painter denied the claim, reaffirming his support for responsible mining. Rep Collins asked Mr. Painter to provide examples of mines he supported, and Mr. Painter cited Minnesota’s iron mining industry as a well-regulated and successful example. Rep Collins then challenged Mr. Painter on bonding requirements for hard rock mining, suggesting that new technologies had made it more environmentally responsible, and Mr. Painter insisted that companies must be willing to guarantee site cleanup. Rep Collins countered that modern mining practices had significantly reduced environmental impact, while Mr. Painter maintained that companies like Glencore had refused to provide necessary financial assurances for projects such as the PolyMet mine.

• Ranking Member Dexter asked Mr. Painter about SpaceX’s involvement in federal investigations and reports that Elon Musk had held undisclosed meetings with Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, and Mr. Painter emphasized that government contractors with access to classified information were required to disclose foreign contacts and could face legal penalties for failing to do so. The Ranking Member then asked how the Office of Government Ethics would typically advise Musk on handling such conflicts, and Mr. Painter responded that Musk should either divest from SpaceX or recuse himself from any related decision-making. Ranking Member Dexter inquired about who was responsible for ensuring Musk complied with ethics laws, and Mr. Painter stated that the President was responsible but argued that Musk’s role required Senate confirmation due to the level of authority he exercised. Ranking Member Dexter questioned what safeguards existed to prevent Musk from using his position at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to obstruct investigations, and Mr. Painter responded that oversight from both Congress and the Executive Branch was essential, particularly in ensuring Musk’s financial disclosures were publicly available. The Ranking Member raised concerns about SpaceX’s personnel influencing FAA restructuring while the agency was simultaneously investigating the company, and Mr. Painter asserted that Musk should recuse himself from all FAA-related matters to avoid a legal conflict of interest. Ranking Member Dexter noted that multiple inspectors general had been fired under Trump, weakening independent oversight, and asked how to ensure Musk did not undermine FAA regulations for SpaceX’s financial benefit, and Mr. Painter urged the President to reappoint inspectors general and called for stronger congressional oversight.

• Rep. Begich asked Mr. Painter what financial structure would best allow U.S. taxpayers to benefit from investments in space mining, and Mr. Painter suggested that equity participation might be preferable over debt financing, given the high risks associated with the industry. Rep. Begich agreed that taxpayers should receive returns on public-private investments.

  Rep. Begich asked whether Astro Forge planned to keep mined materials in orbit for space construction or return them to Earth, and Mr. Place explained that while in-space manufacturing was possible, the company’s primary goal was refining materials on-site and bringing them back to Earth.

  Rep. Begich asked Mr. Schroff how the U.S. could maintain a competitive advantage over China in space mining, and Mr. Schroff argued that speed and rapid innovation were the keys to ensuring U.S. leadership. Rep. Begich then asked if Starpath and Astro Forge could collaborate in space resource development, and Mr. Schroff responded that their technologies could complement each other, particularly in reducing transportation costs for mined materials.

• Rep. Hernández asked why the average American should care about financial conflicts of interest in the federal government, emphasizing their impact on taxpayers and public trust. Mr. Painter responded that taxpayer money was at stake and warned that without proper oversight, public funds could be misused for private gain, leading to crony capitalism. Rep. Hernández then asked if there were historical precedents of financial conflicts harming public interests, and Mr. Painter cited examples ranging from plantation owners obstructing early anti-slavery efforts to modern billionaires entering government with conflicts of interest. Rep. Hernández agreed on the need for transparency and accountability at all levels of government.

• Chairman Gosar asked Mr. Schroff whether he evaluated his employees, and Mr. Schroff confirmed that he did, explaining that high-performing employees should be encouraged while low-performing ones should be reassessed.

  The Chairman also questioned about oversight of students, and Prof. Cabrera confirmed that students were regularly assessed to improve their performance. The Chairman emphasized that oversight and accountability were common across industries, joking about the obviousness of these evaluations.

  Chairman Gosar asked whether Resolution Copper’s mining techniques could inform space mining, and Prof. Cabrera confirmed that they could because they involved harsh underground environments. When The Chairman asked about the depth of Resolution Copper’s operations, Prof. Cabrera stated it was approximately 8,000 feet. The Chairman highlighted the importance of testing mining technologies under extreme conditions and asked where such tests would first take place. Prof. Cabrera responded that all space mining technology would first be tested on Earth to ensure feasibility before deployment in space.

  Chairman Gosar asked whether space mining would involve transporting raw ore or refined materials back to Earth, and the witnesses confirmed that concentrators would be used to process materials in space before transportation. The Chairman questioned how these concentrators were tested, and the witnesses explained that they would undergo testing on Earth for efficiency, environmental impact, and scalability.

  Chairman Gosar asked Mr. Painter if he was aware that the Twin Metals mine had some of the highest environmental standards, and Mr. Painter acknowledged that Congress had set specific regulations for the mine. The Chairman argued that bonding requirements ensured proper cleanup, countering concerns about mining-related environmental damage. Mr. Painter agreed that bonding was a legal requirement but insisted that enforcement was crucial to ensuring accountability.

• Rep. Collins asked Mr. Schroff to confirm that Starpath planned to mine rocket propellant on the Moon, and Mr. Schroff affirmed that this was the company’s goal. Rep. Collins then asked what had accelerated the prospects for space mineral extraction, and Mr. Schroff credited SpaceX’s advancements in launch capabilities, arguing that without SpaceX, the U.S. would not be competitive in the space industry. When Rep. Collins asked if SpaceX was a success, Mr. Schroff confirmed that it was, pointing to its contributions to commercial space ventures and global internet access through Starlink. Rep. Collins asked if space mining faced regulatory challenges similar to terrestrial mining, and Mr. Schroff acknowledged concerns but stated that current space regulations were not yet overly burdensome. He emphasized that while safety regulations were necessary, excessive restrictions could slow down innovation. Rep. Collins then asked how the lack of in-space refueling affected space travel, and Mr. Schroff explained that traditional missions discarded most of their rocket mass, making space travel inefficient and costly. Rep. Collins asked when Starpath expected to establish a functional lunar mining operation, and Mr. Schroff stated that the company aimed to deploy its first mine by the end of 2026. He projected that Starpath would scale operations exponentially, making commercial products available between 2026 and 2028. Rep.

• Rep. Begich asked where equity participation for U.S. taxpayers in space mining programs should be parked, specifically inquiring about a proposed sovereign wealth fund. Mr. Painter responded that equity could be held in a governmental or semi-governmental entity but warned of the risks associated with public-private financial ventures, citing historical abuses in other sectors such as mortgage lending and student loans. Rep. Begich noted that Alaska had successfully managed a sovereign wealth-like fund through the Alaska Permanent Fund, which had reduced tax burdens in the state, and then shifted the discussion to regulatory concerns in space.

  Rep. Begich asked Mr. Schroff to outline the risks of allowing China to surpass the U.S. in space resource extraction. Mr. Schroff compared space mining to other emerging industries, arguing that losing technological leadership would be as concerning as falling behind in artificial intelligence. Rep. Begich then asked how harnessing lunar materials would benefit the U.S., and Mr. Schroff responded that lunar propellant production could drastically reduce mission costs, noting that the Artemis program’s current launch costs exceeded $2 billion per launch. He also highlighted the Moon’s abundance of helium-3, which he predicted would become one of the highest-value materials in future energy markets.

• Rep. Stauber criticized the regulatory and permitting delays in U.S. mining, arguing that these barriers had driven discussions about extracting minerals from space rather than utilizing domestic resources. He pointed out that Minnesota’s Duluth Complex held the largest untapped copper-nickel reserves in the world but remained underdeveloped due to regulatory hurdles. He then asked Dr. Cabrera how much it would cost to extract minerals domestically compared to space mining, referencing the $1.2 billion cost of recovering 121 grams from asteroid Bennu. Prof. Cabrera admitted he could not immediately calculate a precise figure but stated that mining on Earth, absent regulatory delays, should be significantly cheaper. Rep. Stauber asked whether domestic mining would result in lower costs for Americans, and Prof. Cabrera affirmed that responsible U.S. mining would be more cost-effective than space mining. Rep. Stauber then asked about the broader economic and national security benefits of domestic mining, and Prof. Cabrera explained that modern mining practices not only ensured environmental responsibility but also produced critical co-products necessary for defense applications. Rep. Stauber noted that technological advances had turned previously discarded mining waste into valuable resources and cited examples like Michigan’s Eagle Mine, where tailings were now being reprocessed due to improved extraction technologies.

  Rep. Stauber asked Mr. Painter whether he knew where Minnesota’s cleanest drinking water was located, suggesting that it was found in the state’s mining region. Mr. Painter acknowledged that he was not sure, and Rep. Stauber confirmed that it was in Butcha, Minnesota, crediting modern reclamation and cleanup practices. Rep. Stauber then asked if Mr. Painter was aware of any U.S. mining operations that used child or forced labor, and Mr. Painter stated he was not aware of any American-owned mines engaged in such practices. Rep. Stauber emphasized that U.S. mining followed stringent labor and environmental regulations, unlike operations in China. Rep. Stauber asked Mr. Painter whether he preferred U.S.-owned mining operations over those controlled by foreign billionaires. Mr. Painter responded that he supported American-owned mines that adhered to strict environmental and labor standards. Rep. Stauber criticized companies like Glencore, which had a controversial global reputation, and emphasized that Minnesota’s mining operations had long adhered to U.S. regulations. Mr. Painter agreed that American-owned mining was preferable and stressed that foreign corporations should not be allowed to exploit domestic resources without proper oversight.

• Ranking Member Dexter asked Mr. Schroff what would happen to his company if public funding for space mining projects were to stop. Mr. Schroff stated that while his company was built on a commercial-first model and would survive, a loss of government support would be a missed opportunity. He cited Falcon 9 as an example of a successful public-private partnership, explaining that SpaceX’s collaboration with NASA had created a cost-effective launch vehicle that now dominated the commercial space market. The Ranking Member asked if Falcon 9’s success directly benefited American taxpayers. Mr. Schroff responded that while he could not speak for SpaceX, Falcon 9 had enabled lower-cost launches for NASA, reducing the agency’s expenses and indirectly benefiting taxpayers.

  Ranking Member Dexter then turned to Mr. Painter and asked whether he believed taxpayers were seeing direct returns on their space investments. Mr. Painter compared the discussion to an episode of Shark Tank, questioning whether the federal government could afford further investments given the $36 trillion national debt. He stressed that any government officials involved in these ventures must be free of financial conflicts of interest. The Ranking Member asked Mr. Painter whether he had concerns about proposals to sell public lands to fund space exploration. Mr. Painter expressed strong reservations, arguing that the government was already financially strained and should not take on additional speculative investments. The Ranking Member then brought up SpaceX’s growing number of federal contracts and questioned how the government could ensure impartiality in awarding contracts when Musk oversaw budget cuts that could affect agencies like NASA. Mr. Painter insisted that Musk must either divest from SpaceX or fully recuse himself from any matters involving NASA to comply with conflict-of-interest laws.

• Chairman Gosar asked how much Resolution Copper had spent on site remediation, and Prof. Cabrera estimated that cleanup costs were in the tens of millions, approaching $2 billion. The Chairman then asked how many American corporations could afford such a cost before extracting an ounce of copper, and Prof. Cabrera responded that very few could. The Chairman then asked Dr. Cabrera if he was familiar with micro smelters, and Prof. Cabrera confirmed that he was aware of the technology. The Chairman explained that micro smelters were more efficient and could extract multiple valuable minerals, asking if that would benefit mining operations, and Prof. Cabrera agreed that it would, once proven at scale.

  Chairman Gosar shifted to Mr. Painter, asking if he would support a law requiring that oversight board members of national security or energy-related businesses be U.S. citizens or green card holders. Mr. Painter agreed that security clearances were necessary but noted that not all U.S. citizens should be trusted in these positions. The Chairman then asked if requiring citizenship would allow for legal accountability, such as charges of treason in cases of wrongdoing, and Mr. Painter acknowledged that it could, but reiterated that some citizens still posed security risks. The Chairman asked if Mr. Painter would support allocating proceeds from public lands toward the Social Security Trust Fund, arguing that monetizing these lands could generate revenue. Mr. Painter agreed that if the government profited from public lands, directing those funds to Social Security would be a reasonable use. The Chairman then asked whether unelected bureaucrats who lack accountability had failed the American people, and Mr. Painter agreed that ineffective officials could fail to serve the public interest. The Chairman then referenced Ezekiel Emanuel’s role in crafting the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and questioned whether he had too much influence despite not being an elected official. Mr. Painter responded that while the ACA had served Americans in some ways, concerns over policy influence were valid. The Chairman argued that private-sector figures like Emanuel should be scrutinized for their influence over federal policies, questioning whether he had properly disclosed his involvement. Mr. Painter responded that while private advisors play a role in policy development, they do not engage in direct oversight like Musk, who holds financial interests in industries he regulates. The Chairman challenged Mr. Painter on his certainty regarding Emanuel’s actions, arguing that emails and informal influence could have played a significant role in ACA development. Mr. Painter reiterated that special government employees do not typically exercise direct authority and suggested that Musk should either be formally appointed and confirmed by the Senate or divest from conflicts of interest.

ADD TO THE NIMITZ NETWORK

Know someone else who would enjoy our updates? Feel free to forward them this email and have them subscribe here.