When the U.S. and Australia announced their ambitious $8.5 billion agreement to accelerate the supply of critical minerals last week, headlines buzzed with its potential to reduce dependence on Chinese supply chains and fuel clean energy transitions. However, behind the scenes, a more fundamental problem could undermine the pact’s promise: a global, growing shortage of geoscientists.
Despite being the world’s largest supplier of hard-rock lithium and zirconium and home to over 350 mining operations, Australia is experiencing a worrying decline in geoscience education and workforce capabilities. According to David Cohen, former president of the Australian Geoscience Council, “If you can’t find those resources to begin with, there ain’t nothing to sell.” The nation's ability to capitalize on its rich mineral endowment depends not just on geology but on the people who practice it: geoscientists, mining engineers, and hydrologists.
Over the past 15 years, the number of accredited geoscience programs in Australian universities has plummeted from 21 to just 13. Several institutions, including Macquarie University, the University of Newcastle, and the University of Wollongong, have closed or merged their geoscience departments. The situation at the Australian National University is similarly strained, with budget reductions amounting to nearly 50% in real terms since 2020. As geologist Hugo Olierook of Curtin University bluntly put it: “The future for home-grown talent is bleak.”
This talent drain comes at a time when geoscience skills are more needed than ever, not only for resource exploration but also to support research into climate change, water supply, and environmental management. The Australian Academy of Science warns that without drastic intervention, the country may face a “capability gap” in geosciences by 2035.
This trend isn't isolated to Australia. The U.S., too, is projected to face a shortfall of 130,000 geologists by the decade's end, according to the American Geosciences Institute. Across the Atlantic, the U.K. reports continual declines in undergraduate enrolment in geosciences since 2019, despite needing at least 60 new graduates annually in geology, mining engineering, and mineral processing. The cause is complex: stereotypes of mining as environmentally harmful, unstable job markets in the industry, and outdated perceptions of geoscience careers. Caroline Tiddy of the University of South Australia says geology isn’t perceived as “flashy,” while damaging actions by mining companies, including Rio Tinto’s destruction of the Indigenous heritage site Juukan Gorge in 2020, have further soured public perception.
With fewer young minds entering the field and an increasing number of seasoned geologists retiring, attention has turned to technology, particularly AI, as a possible solution. AI-powered tools are already being deployed to scan core samples, model geological data, and even forecast mineral-rich areas with predictive analysis.
AI is also being used by national authorities. Graham Lederer, a geologist with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), is involved in a government-backed AI initiative, CriticalMAAS, that’s 100 times more efficient than traditional methods for mapping out critical mineral resources under the U.S. Energy Act of 2020.
But the promise of AI comes with caveats. Experts warn that algorithms cannot yet replicate the nuanced, three-dimensional reasoning that experienced geologists apply, particularly in interpreting deep-time geological processes. “You will still need good geologists to verify AI predictions, not to mention do all the other non-computer-based work,” says Rupert Osborn, a product manager at mining software company Micromine. The consensus is that AI should be viewed as a force multiplier, not a replacement. “Geologists with data science skills will only become more employable,” the Australian Institute of Geoscientists argues.
Beyond the skills shortage, concerns are also rising over the geopolitical and economic dependencies that the U.S.-Australia deal may inadvertently create. With the U.S. also pursuing rare earth partnerships with emerging suppliers in Africa, Europe, and Asia, Australia could find itself facing stiff competition for market share despite its resource advantage.
Moreover, observers warn that relying too heavily on U.S. markets may substitute one dependency (China) for another, leaving Australia vulnerable to shifts in American political winds, especially given the potential volatility attached to U.S. election cycles.
“The partnership’s sustainability depends heavily on continued bipartisan support within the United States,” notes a report analyzing the “hidden costs” of the $13 billion rare-earth alliance under President Donald Trump’s administration. A future administration could reverse course, prioritize domestic manufacturing, or cut strategic minerals funding.
To be ready for the critical minerals boom, universities, government, and industry must work in tandem. John Grimes, CEO of the Smart Energy Council, recently called for investment in the “entire skills ecosystem.” The Australian government says it is committed to boosting education and training as part of its critical minerals strategy, but such investments take time to bear fruit.
Professor Akbar Rhamdhani of Swinburne University emphasizes the need for advanced domestic processing capabilities. Currently, Australia exports most of its lithium to China in the low-value form of spodumene, capturing only 6% of total market revenue. Establishing onshore facilities to transform raw materials into high-purity lithium compounds like lithium carbonate and lithium metal is essential, but this requires both capital and a skilled workforce.
Efforts are also being made to revamp the branding of geosciences. “We are seeing universities like Queensland and Melbourne move away from using the term 'geology' and instead adopt 'Earth Sciences' to broaden appeal and avoid negative connotations,” says AIG CEO Jaime Livesey.
As nations race to secure the raw materials that underpin clean energy technologies, the shortage of geoscientists could become a global bottleneck. AI may relieve some of the pressure, but ultimately, it is human ingenuity trained, trusted, and valued that will determine whether Australia and its partners can deliver on the lofty promises of a new minerals age.
Without a concerted, strategic push to rebuild and modernize the geoscience pipeline, Australia’s resource-rich lands may hold far more promise than they do practical value. Because as David Cohen so succinctly put it: “If you can’t find those resources to begin with, there ain’t nothing to sell.”