Graphite One’s Alaska Gamble Hinges on Rare Earths as Tariff Shield Collapses and Permitting Clock Ticks

Graphite One loses tariff protection and exclusive fast-track status as ITC rejects duties on Chinese imports. Stock down 33% amid local opposition and financing hurdles, with rare earths offering a potential lifeline.

The United States is pushing to build a home-grown graphite supply chain, but Graphite One is discovering that policy support comes with fine print that keeps shifting. The company’s flagship project in Alaska has lost two critical pillars in quick succession: the promise of punitive tariffs on Chinese material vanished in March, and its exclusive spot on a fast-track permitting program is now shared with rivals. The stock, trading around €0.75, has surrendered more than a third of its value since January.

The U.S. International Trade Commission dealt the heaviest blow when it refused to impose anti-dumping duties on active anode material from China. The Commerce Department had recommended combined tariffs of roughly 220 percent, but the ITC found no material injury to domestic producers. With no price penalty on Chinese imports—China controls over 95 percent of global anode processing—battery makers have little incentive to buy more expensive American graphite.

At the same time, Graphite One’s regulatory head start is eroding. The company won FAST-41 designation for its Alaska project in June 2025, a streamlined environmental review process designed to fast-track critical minerals. In March 2026, two other domestic graphite developers—Westwater Resources’ Coosa project in Alabama and a 40,000-tonne-per-year processing plant planned by Kilbourne in New York—also secured FAST-41 status. The Department of Energy now lists all three as priority projects.

The permitting timeline is further complicated by local resistance in Alaska. The Clean Water Act review attracted 301 public comments, more than 83 percent of which raised concerns or outright opposition. Two native village corporations are demanding high-level consultations. Regulators must now decide whether a simplified environmental assessment suffices or whether a full environmental impact statement is needed. The latter could push the decision well past the critical September 2026 deadline, jeopardizing a planned 2027 construction start.

On the financing side, the picture is brighter but conditional. The U.S. Export-Import Bank issued a non-binding letter of interest for up to $2.07 billion, covering about 70 percent of estimated project costs. That figure breaks down into $670 million for the Alaska mine and $1.4 billion for a processing facility in Ohio. But the formal loan application will only proceed after federal permits are in hand, creating a chicken-and-egg dynamic.

Graphite One is betting on a wildcard to improve the economics: rare earth elements. Independent assays have found elevated concentrations of dysprosium, scandium, and yttrium in the ore body, with no toxic by-products like uranium. A national U.S. laboratory is evaluating extraction methods and expects results later this year. If positive, the company could unlock a second revenue stream that is not currently reflected in its market valuation.

The Ohio plant, which targets production of battery-grade anode material from 2028, would start at 48,000 tonnes annually and scale to 169,000 tonnes by 2031. Whether that timeline holds depends on decisions made hundreds of miles away in Alaska. Graphite One’s share price, down more than 50 percent from its January 2026 high of around €1.50, leaves little room for error as the September permitting cliff approaches.