PwC Australia has sounded the alarm: just 13 of the 907 critical minerals projects in the nation’s pipeline could reach a final investment decision (FID) within the next two to four years.
Its latest report finds projects are progressing too slowly, threatening Australia’s ability to meet demand from allies and trading partners.
Speaking to Mining.com.au, PwC Australia Energy, Utilities & Resources Partner Lachy Haynes says the analysis began with a sovereign investor seeking Australian minerals to support its domestic battery supply chain.
To listen to the interview, click here:
Haynes authored the report, ‘Can we get serious now? Securing Australia’s critical minerals future’.
“We were engaged to look at what investment possibilities there were and found that when looking across the whole Australian mining value chain — from exploration to production — there were lots of projects in this space, but actually few in those final stages of getting to FID,” Haynes says.
PwC identifies 117 projects — about one in 10 or 13% of the total — within its ‘investable universe’. These projects have progressed beyond exploration but have yet to reach FID, with a primary commodity on the Australian Government’s critical or strategic minerals list.
Nearly 90% of those projects are three to six years from FID, with more complex developments potentially taking up to 10 years. Some 53% are at the Prefeasibility Study (PFS) stage, while another 36% are at the Scoping Study stage.
“The development of Australia’s critical minerals pipeline is not keeping pace with demand,” Haynes says.
Australia’s critical minerals push faces policy-investment disconnect
The Australian Government has committed $28 billion to the critical minerals and rare earths sector since 2022, spanning initiatives including the Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve, Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, and Critical Minerals Facility, according PwC.
However, the report identifies a disconnect between policy and investment decisions. Much of that support is prospective, conditional, or structured as tax incentives that deliver value only once projects are producing, leaving many earlier-stage developments without the support they need.
Haynes notes critical minerals have become central to government agendas, extending beyond the energy transition to AI, automation (productivity), trade and industrialisation (growth), and defence (security).
Australia has the minerals the world needs, he says, but must turn that endowment into commercially viable supply for its allies and trading partners.
The country’s success in bulk commodities provides foundations, but Haynes argues that Australia needs to consider what comes next not just in mining, but also in the midstream processing and downstream industries.
“To be able to capitalise on the entire critical minerals value chain puts Australia in a privileged geopolitical and economic position with our trade partners and allies and allows us to maintain that position as a partner of choice,” Haynes says.
“The risk is that these partners will find these minerals elsewhere if we can’t supply them.”
PWC finds the overall project pipeline has barely moved since its ‘Aussie Mine 2025’ report. Of the 907 total critical minerals projects identified, 675 are in exploration or reserve development, 87 are producing, and 20 are under construction.
The analysis also identifies eight processing facility projects, representing just 1% of the total.
Between 2022 and June 2026, six upstream projects reached FID: four lithium projects, one rare earths project, and one base and technology metals project. PwC highlights that there was a gap of almost four years before the remaining five reached the milestone between March and June 2026.
Australia’s investable universe is also concentrated in just three critical minerals. Copper accounts for 29%, nickel for 15%, and rare earth elements for 10%. A further 31% covers vanadium, tin, graphite, lithium, zinc, and cobalt projects.
Funding, scale, and time weigh on project pipeline
Australia’s key advantage, and reason the country cannot let its critical minerals future slip by, is because it remains a resource partner of choice for many allied nations. The country is supported by its mineral endowment, history as a reliable supplier, and relatively low sovereign risk, PwC says.
But those advantages do not remove the barriers to development. Haynes explains funding is only part of the challenge.
“In the report, we highlight the scale challenge that we have.” Haynes says.
“These are smaller projects and the explorers and developers typically have smaller balance sheets, so there aren’t a lot of credit-worthy participants.
“Companies like BHP Group (ASX:BHP) or Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO) have these big balance sheets and good access to capital, but we don’t often see that type of big player in the critical minerals space.
“So, funding might be the overarching issue, but when you look at it, it also comes down to scale and the creditworthiness of the participants.”
Time is another constraint. Projects must progress through, resource definition, technical studies, and financing before construction and commissioning can begin.
“That process has been stretched out for a long period of time and remains so today,” Haynes says.
Haynes argues speed to production is becoming increasingly important. It is less about being the lowest cost, but much more about if you can deliver something within the time frames the end-users want.
“Australia is taking concrete steps to diversify its supply chain, but that’s got to come with some urgency and intent,” Haynes says.
“And that’s certainly how our trading partners are looking at it. The challenge we have is to find ways to keep our pipeline moving with the same sort of urgency and intent as our trading partners.”
The problem is not uniquely Australian. Locally, however, labour availability and costs, energy prices, and the expense of building new infrastructure are adding to the difficulty of bringing projects into production.
Fast-track strategies for our critical minerals future
PwC outlines four strategies to advance Australia’s critical minerals pipeline: fast-track projects, develop shared infrastructure precincts, reshape investment propositions, and repurpose ageing industrial facilities.
The first involves rethinking investment, permitting, and land-use decisions so uncontested projects can progress more quickly, while maintaining regulatory scrutiny.
The second focuses on precincts rather than standalone projects. Shared infrastructure could spread capital requirements across several companies and improve project economics.
Haynes says the critical minerals industry should look to the aggregation models used in some of Australia’s major iron ore basins.
“If mines are in close proximity, they could look to operate in some form of cluster or precinct hub, solving for some of these infrastructure issues like energy, water, logistics at once and hopefully get some of the benefits of scale that way,” Haynes says.
The third strategy is to reshape investment propositions to attract sovereign wealth funds, superannuation funds, and other institutional investors.
“We need to be more creative in unlocking sovereign wealth and superannuation funds because it’s the long-term patient capital that is needed here,” Haynes says.
“Typically this type of capital hasn’t gravitated toward commodity risk, and so a bit of thought is required to get some credit into this space,” Haynes says.
PwC’s final recommendation focuses on repurposing ageing industrial facilities to capture downstream opportunities — “to boost upstream option values, to maintain Australia’s position as a critical minerals partner of choice, and secure added value for Australians”.
Many governments around the world are currently seeking this type of integrated critical minerals value chain to strengthen security of supply while creating opportunities to add value domestically.
Haynes envisages Australia expanding its midstream processing capacity.
“It would be great to see Australia get to a position where it can extract the minerals effectively and push them straight into the midstream. I think we miss a large part of the opportunity if we can’t create an integrated solution, which would be good for not only Australia but our allies as well.”
In PwC’s assessment, Australia’s critical minerals sector sits at a crossroads: the nation has the geology, geopolitical advantages, and government backing, but without faster movement through the project pipeline, those strengths risk being squandered.
PwC’s warning is clear — urgency and intent need to match ambition. Unlocking capital, streamlining approvals, and building midstream capacity could strengthen Australia’s role as a partner of choice in global supply chains. Further delays, however, could see allies look elsewhere, leaving Australia watching from the sidelines as the critical minerals race accelerates.
Write to Amy Rotman at Mining.com.au
Images: PwC
