As the world accelerates toward electric vehicles (EVs), graphite has emerged as a critical — and vulnerable — component in the battery revolution.
Found at the heart of every lithium-ion battery, graphite forms the battery’s anode, making it indispensable for both the automotive and clean energy transitions.
Yet, its singular importance now exposes deep fault lines in global supply chains, raising urgent questions about how secure — and sustainable — the EV surge can truly be.
According to research from GlobalData, China held 81 million tonnes of natural graphite reserves in 2025, representing nearly 28 per cent of the global total.
The nation’s dominance is even more pronounced in production and processing: China accounted for 82 per cent of global graphite output in 2024, refining over 90 per cent of the world’s graphite into battery-grade materials.
This concentration is not just numerical, but increasingly geopolitical.
Martina Raveni, analyst at GlobalData, warns: “China’s graphite monopoly poses a threat to global supply chains and countries dependent on graphite imports, as the country dominates procurement (especially in Africa and South America) and processing.”
She adds: “The monopolisation of such essential resources has caused global concern as the availability and market price are contingent on Chinese export policies.”
In response to the US restricting semiconductor exports, Beijing tightened its grip by requiring new export permits for several minerals, including graphite, in July 2023.
“China will likely continue to restrict graphite exports, using its position as the primary producer and refiner,” Raveni forecasts.
By December 2024, China had imposed export restrictions on key anode materials, including high-purity synthetic and flake graphite, citing national security and industrial interests.
Belinda Labatte, executive chair at Canadian critical minerals developer Lomiko, bluntly frames the dilemma, stating: “As has been widely reported, China has carefully constructed a chokehold strategy of economic hegemony so, yes, having one country with all the elements of a defence and new tech supply chain is a problem.”
She points to China’s US$13 billion annual spend on critical minerals as a key lever of influence: “Economic warfare through supply chain dominance is the new generational battle we are in.”
Labatte urges: “We do not need regulations to loosen, but we do need to transform how we work to transform ourselves from a capital markets-based approach to funding to a public/private partnership approach.”
International alarm is reflected in mounting policy responses.
The US and Australia are racing to develop domestic graphite resources, while the European Union has classified graphite as a critical raw material, launching initiatives to develop local supplies.
“Whether China’s global graphite dominance is a problem is a matter of perspective,” observes Corina Hebestreit, secretary general at the European Advanced Carbon and Graphite Materials Association.
“From a Chinese perspective, certainly not; from a US or European and a NATO perspective, certainly yes.
“This is why all these entities have decided on policies to increase [their] own supply, or at the very least diversify sourcing.”
Hebestreit highlights a paradox, stating: “Actually, graphite as such is not a scarce resource: it is the accessibility and the availability of investments that is restricting the access to natural graphite.”
The urgency is pressing.
The International Energy Agency now regards graphite as one of the materials “most exposed to potential supply risks”.
Each EV battery can contain anywhere from 50kg in entry-level models to over 100kg in premium vehicles, underscoring how battery production is tightly chained to graphite supply.
While policymakers scramble, industry players are exploring workarounds. In the US, battery-grade graphite projects span from Alaska to Alabama and Louisiana, aiming to ramp up domestic capacity by the end of the decade.
The EU is likewise forging new joint ventures and strategic projects across Sweden, Finland, and elsewhere in the bloc.
Yet, for now, these efforts remain dwarfed by the scale of Chinese capacity.
Synthetic graphite — favoured for its purity and longevity — offers an alternative but is more expensive to produce and carries a higher carbon footprint.
“Synthetic graphite…costs more than double the price of natural graphite, and its production is very energy-intensive,” Raveni notes.
Environmental and permitting hurdles in the West further complicate rapid industry scale-up.
Aidan Knight of GlobalData suggests possible mitigations: “They can implement cleaner mining technologies such as dry processing, dust suppression systems…and enclosed processing plants to reduce fugitive dust and water usage.”
Nevertheless, scaling new supply remains a tall order on tight timelines.
Despite policy maneuvers and industrial alliances, the reality persists: China’s dominance in graphite production and processing continues to cast a long shadow over the EV and battery supply chains.
For now, global automakers and energy companies remain vulnerable to shifts in Chinese policy — and to the tremors of geopolitical rivalry.
Western nations see a major opportunity to build independent and resilient supply chains.
Whether the push to diversify can outpace the rising demand for graphite and the ever-present risk of new export restrictions is the central question dogging the future of the energy transition.
As Hebestreit concludes: “It is not [about] loosening legislation, but more a question of speedy and unconfrontational implementation of existing legislation.”
In the worldwide race for the batteries of tomorrow, graphite is poised to remain both a keystone — and an Achilles’ heel — for years to come.
