← Back to Library

Yes, transformers are a problem

Jordan Schneider cuts through the noise of grid modernization debates with a provocative thesis: solving the transformer shortage is merely a bandage on a much deeper wound in America's power infrastructure. While headlines obsess over copper and steel, Schneider argues that the real existential threat lies in wide-bandgap semiconductors—specifically gallium—and the geopolitical chokepoints they create. This piece forces a necessary pivot from general supply chain anxiety to a precise diagnosis of where American energy security actually breaks down.

Beyond the Iron and Copper

Schneider begins with a thought experiment that immediately dismantles conventional wisdom. He asks readers to imagine a genie granting an infinite supply of transformers, gas turbines, and streamlined permitting. Even with these miracles, he insists, "Grid supply chain problems go far deeper than transformers and gas turbines." This is a crucial distinction often missed in policy circles that treat the grid as a monolith. The author drives this home by noting that while we have spent years mapping the semiconductor supply chain for compute—learning of ASML's monopoly or TSMC's dominance—we have largely ignored the power electronics sector.

Yes, transformers are a problem

The argument gains traction when Schneider separates commodities into two categories: those that can be bought with enough money, and those that cannot. He illustrates this with a hypothetical 2027 scenario where China closes its markets to the West. In this crisis, prices for most metals spike only briefly before falling as global traders like Trafigura and Glencore reroute supplies. "Turns out our vulnerabilities in this space are almost entirely restricted to a few elements — some notable rare earths, and importantly, gallium," Schneider writes. This reframing is powerful because it shifts the focus from a blanket "critical minerals" panic to a targeted analysis of specific bottlenecks.

However, critics might argue that relying on global trading firms to bypass geopolitical blockades during an active military escalation is overly optimistic. The assumption that ships can simply be reflagged or rerouted ignores the reality of naval interdiction and the speed at which modern conflicts can escalate. Yet, Schneider's point about economic incentives holding true for base metals like copper remains a strong counter-narrative to the doom-laden "resource war" rhetoric often heard in Washington.

The critical distinction: while lithium, copper, and even most rare earths are obtainable with proper incentives, some elements are not. Gallium and certain rare earths necessary for power electronics top this list.

The Semiconductor Grid

The piece then pivots to the technology that will define the future grid: wide-bandgap (WBG) semiconductors like silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN). Schneider explains that these devices are replacing traditional iron-and-copper transformers with active, controllable units. While traditional transformers have been largely unchanged for over a century, solid-state transformers (SSTs) can be "up to 14 times smaller and roughly 40 times lighter than the equipment it replaces." This technological leap is not just about efficiency; it is about enabling the grid to handle the volatility of renewable energy.

Schneider highlights that while SSTs solve the Grain-Oriented Electrical Steel (GOES) bottleneck—a material where China produces 56% of global supply—they introduce a new dependency. "It would be ironic to fix the long maligned transformer shortage and associated chokepoint by switching to a technology that has similar dependencies and no plan for independent production," he warns. This is the article's most biting insight: we are trading one vulnerability for another, potentially worse one.

The author notes that China leads in advanced magnets needed for these new systems, producing over 85% of the required types. Even if the US can substitute silicon carbide for gallium nitride where necessary, the exposure remains significant. The argument is bolstered by the mention of startups like Amperesand and DG Matrix raising tens of millions to deploy this tech, proving the market is moving fast even as the supply chain lags behind.

A Historical Parallel

To ground his warning about domestic capacity, Schneider draws a sharp parallel to historical failures in industrial policy. He references the decline of the US GOES industry despite decades of political handwringing, noting that Cleveland-Cliffs is now the only producer in North America with capacity far below consumption needs. This mirrors the trajectory seen in other high-tech sectors where strategic underinvestment led to total reliance on foreign suppliers.

Schneider's analysis suggests that the solution isn't just more money, but a recognition of which materials are truly irreplaceable. He points out that while the West hasn't built many mines recently due to low prices and permitting hurdles, "the United States hasn't built many mines or refineries in recent memory due to a combination of low metals prices... difficult permitting processes, and a lack of urgency." This distinction between "can't" and "haven't" is vital. For most minerals, the US could produce them if the price were right; for gallium, the supply chain is so concentrated that money alone may not fix it in a conflict scenario.

The power electronics supply chain is a case study in an industry where no amount of money will fix a shortage caused by conflict with China in the medium term.

Bottom Line

Schneider's strongest contribution is his refusal to treat all critical minerals as equal, forcing a necessary granularity into energy security discussions. His argument that we are swapping a steel bottleneck for a semiconductor one is both timely and alarming. However, the piece leans heavily on market mechanisms to solve non-market problems, potentially underestimating how quickly geopolitical friction can freeze global trading networks regardless of price incentives. The reader must now watch whether US policy shifts from broad "critical minerals" lists to targeted investments in gallium and wide-bandgap semiconductor manufacturing before the next crisis hits.

Deep Dives

Explore these related deep dives:

  • High-voltage direct current

    The article argues that HVDC converters and filters represent a critical, overlooked bottleneck in grid expansion that is far more severe than the transformer shortage itself.

  • Gallium arsenide

    While the text mentions gallium as a mineral, this specific compound is the essential semiconductor material for power electronics that China dominates and which enables the high-efficiency data center infrastructure discussed.

  • Shanghai Futures Exchange

    The author uses the potential closure of this specific exchange during a Taiwan conflict to illustrate how supply chain vulnerabilities extend beyond mining to the actual trading mechanisms that price critical minerals globally.

Sources

Yes, transformers are a problem

by Jordan Schneider · ChinaTalk · Read full article

Dana Golden is an economist at Argonne National Labs. All opinions in the article are her own and should not be interpreted as reflecting the views of the Department of Energy or Argonne National Labs.

I want to offer you a thought experiment. A genie has agreed to conjure an infinite supply of transformers for integration into US power systems. We’ve heard plenty about the transformer shortage. They’re vital to data centers, construction projects, and grid expansion. With one rub of the lamp, that bottleneck vanishes. Do our power supply chain problems disappear? Can we build all the data centers we want?

Let’s go further. The genie also supplies limitless gas turbines. If you’ve been following the data center energy discourse, this feels like a double whammy — the two big bottlenecks, gone. Throw in a third wish for streamlined permitting. Is the grid supply chain fixed? Can we build out data centers like railroads in 1872?

The answer is clearly no.

Grid supply chain problems go far deeper than transformers and gas turbines. Grid modernization requires many other components with equal or greater supply chain challenges. The DOE’s supply chain mapping for large power transformers alone reveals many inputs with significant interdependencies throughout the power electronics supply chain. If these inputs threaten transformer supply chains, they equally create headaches for the supply chains of other important power electronics.

Go further into the DOE’s work, and you find that the HVDC supply chain lacks significant domestic manufacturing capacity throughout, with components like converters (circuits that help change between voltage levels) and DC filters (devices to suppress electromagnetic interference) not even generating enough domestic demand to encourage new capacity entry.

The economic security community spent years learning the semiconductor supply chain map for compute. We all read Chip War and learned of ASML’s EUV monopoly, TSMC’s fabrication dominance, the handful of firms producing photoresists and etch gases… Not nearly the same attention has been paid to power electronics. It’s time for that to change.

Separating the Gallium from the Copper.

I have another thought experiment for you. It’s 2027, and China has carrier groups in the South China Sea headed for Taiwan. The current US administration has chosen to escalate. Maybe the escalation looks like sanctions. Maybe this is a full-scale military fight. Either way, the Shanghai Metals Exchange is closed for business to the West. Suddenly, analysts get on TV ...