A group of critical mineral developers handpicked by the European Union is now warning Brussels that the money isn’t showing up fast enough to keep their projects alive. According to a document seen by Reuters, 23 of the 60 projects the EU selected as strategic have told the bloc that liquidity problems could put some of them in real jeopardy, and that the shortfall is undercutting Europe’s whole plan to reduce its dependence on China.
How the EU Got Here
The EU picked these 60 projects in two rounds: 47 inside Europe back in March 2025, then 13 more outside the bloc that June. The timing wasn’t random. Beijing had just tightened export controls on several critical minerals needed for electronics, defense, and the broader energy transition, and Brussels wanted a visible answer.
That answer is starting to look shakier than planned. In a letter called an “Urgent Call to Action,” the 23 projects didn’t mince words: “The goal must be to urgently unlock projects, particularly those working towards final investment decision which face acute liquidity and market pressure and immediate jeopardy.” The document went further, arguing that fifteen months after the first round of selections, projects are still dealing with “unfulfilled commitments on financing, market access and permitting, as well as a lack of vision, strategy and coherence in European approaches.”
The Money Gap With the US Is Hard to Ignore
Here’s the number that makes this sting a bit more. The EU says it has mobilized €1.7 billion, or about $1.97 billion, in financing for these strategic projects since December. The US, over the same broad period, has approved nearly $40 billion in critical mineral deals. That’s not a small gap. It’s the kind of difference that shows up directly in which side of the Atlantic actually gets projects into construction first.
The EU isn’t ignoring the pressure. A Commission spokesperson told Reuters that Europe is “moving decisively to strengthen its supply of critical raw materials,” pointing to a framework built to identify strategic projects, speed up permitting, and mobilize the financing needed to turn them into reality. The spokesperson also noted that the EU’s 2024 Critical Raw Materials Act was never designed as a funding pot in the first place. “The Critical Raw Materials Act is not a funding instrument; however it puts forward several measures to support project development,” they said. That’s technically true, but it also means the Act’s headline targets, mining 10%, processing 40%, and recycling 25% of the EU’s mineral needs by 2030, don’t come with a matching pile of cash behind them.
Viridian Lithium Is the Cautionary Tale Everyone Points To
If you want a concrete example of what happens when the funding doesn’t arrive, Viridian Lithium is it. The French company collapsed in March, and its former chief commercial officer, Luc Pez, told Reuters the lack of EU funding was a direct cause. His framing was blunt: “The selection of Viridian as an EU strategic project was a curse.”
Pez said the company’s private investors were waiting for Europe to actually commit before putting in their own money, and that commitment never came. “Our private investors were waiting for Europe to commit to the project, but it never materialised. The numbers were small, but critical,” he said. Viridian’s project had aimed to cover 10% of the EU’s lithium needs on its own, which makes its collapse more than just one company’s bad luck.
Regulators Have Noticed Too
It’s not just the projects themselves raising the alarm. Back in February, the European Court of Auditors reviewed the bloc’s efforts to diversify away from Chinese mineral imports and found they had “yet to produce tangible results.” That’s about as pointed as an official audit tends to get.
There has been some movement since. At a meeting late last month with Kerstin Jorna, director general of the Commission’s industry department, project representatives reported some progress on engagement, though no urgent financing fix came out of it. One project director who attended, speaking to Reuters on condition of anonymity because of how sensitive the topic is, said it’s still unclear exactly how many of the 60 projects are actually dealing with liquidity problems. That same director added a detail that says a lot about the mood right now: “Several projects have already been put on ice, so the promoters decided not to endorse the call to action to avoid attracting further attention.”
What to Watch
The honest read here is that the EU has the right targets on paper and a framework it can point to, but the financing behind it hasn’t caught up to either the scale of the problem or the pace the US is setting. Whether Brussels closes that gap will show up in a fairly simple place: how many of the remaining 59 projects actually reach final investment decision over the next year, versus how many quietly join Viridian on the list of strategic projects that didn’t survive the wait.
