Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

Rare-Earth Minerals

edited June 9 in Other Investing
Trade talks between the U.S. and China are scheduled on Mon, 6/9 at an undisclosed London location.
Rare-earth mineral exports will surely be one of the main discussion topics.
China can leverage it's near-monopoly in rare-earth processing against our country.
It's imperative that we eliminate our reliance on China for these elements which are vital for national security.
It appears we are making progress in that regard.
The following info is from a recent WSJ email I received.

Q: America invented rare-earth magnets. Can it make them again?

The first rare-earth magnets were discovered in the 1960s in a U.S. Air Force laboratory.
The U.S. was one of the top producers into the 1990s.
But over several decades, China took over.
Now it has a stranglehold on a crucial component of much of the world’s modern technology.
Reporter Jon Emont spoke to us about how the industry shifted and where it’s headed.

A: It was only four decades ago that the U.S. was a global leader in churning out rare-earth magnets—
needed in everything from car motors to F-35 fighter jets.
But since then China has come to dominate the industry,
thanks to its world-leading rare-earth mines and low-cost but sophisticated industrial base.
Allowing this highly strategic industry to leave the U.S. and move to China now looks like
one of the most confounding strategic errors of the 1990s and 2000s.


But what can be built once can be built again.
Since 2020 the U.S. government has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into grants to U.S. companies
seeking to refine rare earths and turn them into magnets.
Progress is being made. In the coming year or two, new U.S. magnet plants are expected to crank up,
which should provide more independence from Chinese suppliers.

But there are still gaps that need to be filled, including expanding non-Chinese production of a certain class
of rare earths—known as “heavies”—which China is currently restricting and which are difficult to produce elsewhere. As the current industry panic over China’s export restrictions has shown,
Beijing’s dominance of rare earths will likely give it real leverage over the U.S for years to come.

Comments

  • There is double-talk by China.

    It says that there are no new export restrictions for rare-earths/magnets, but licensing is required and that has been a slow process and hugely backlogged.
  • It would be painful If China shut down REE trade completely. OTOH, their monopoly on production means they have to export enough to make it financially infeasible to motivate production/recycling in other countries. As it is, I think the cat is out of the bag.

  • WABAC said:

    It would be painful If China shut down REE trade completely. OTOH, their monopoly on production means they have to export enough to make it financially infeasible to motivate production/recycling in other countries. As it is, I think the cat is out of the bag.

    Probably why MP has shot up this past week or so.....
  • edited June 9
    China today is facing deflation pressure as they tried to increase local consumption on goods that are aimed for export. It is not working well at all since the local demand is way too small. Remember their middle class consumers is nowhere the size comparing to the developed countries. So China has their own problem?

    Having said that, US government need to face the question on rebuilding the entire infrastructure from sourcing (raw materials) to manufacturing (finished products) of strategically critical materials domestically. It is funny to have Elon Musk to oversee DODG and yet he has little technical understanding and experience on the matter.

    Today, June 9th, China and US will meet in London to negotiate the trade and tariffs. The topic of rare earth metals is on the agenda. In the meantime, what can US do independent of China for the long term ? Does the US have the political wills to address this problems ?

    Edits:. The rise of synthetic rubber in US during WWII is a good example of American ingenuity and political wills that helped to win the war. There are other great examples too.
  • Sven said:

    China today is facing deflation pressure as they tried to increase local consumption on goods that are aimed for export. It is not working well at all since the local demand is way too small. Remember their middle class consumers is nowhere the size comparing to the developed countries. So China has their own problem?

    Yes they do. Every child born in China should get a free apartment, a rare earth magnet, and a solar panel. The way things are going, by next year they'll get a new EV too.

    I mentioned this in the other thread as well, there will also be recycling. A Canadian company is building a new recycling plant near us in Mesa, AZ.

  • Yes, I saw your earlier post. China’s middle class cannot buy afford all these stuff since they are limited by the income and living space. They don’t own 4,000 square feet houses.

    Recycling of spent electronics in sustainable and environmentally compliant processes would lift US away from the dependence from our business/military adversaries. And we need to move this fast.

    There ought to be a line item in the government budget for these strategic important materials to be produced domestically. Subsides to fund the infrastructure is necessary. Negotiating now from a weak position does not bode well.
  • History suggests that recycling efficiency is often over-stated. I support recycling, up to the point that it becomes inefficient. t this point, I assume most of my personal recycling is ending up in landfills. The energy & labor component to certain recycling efforts can be a limiting factor.

    In the end, having a huge nation with nearly unlimited labor and disregard for their environment may be very beneficial to us. In 50 years, China will be spending vast amounts on their own "Superfund" or living with the toxic results.

    I have not seen any data on rare Earth recycling limitations or costs.
  • Sven said:

    ...

    Having said that, US government need to face the question on rebuilding the entire infrastructure from sourcing (raw materials) to manufacturing (finished products) of strategically critical materials domestically. ...

    Do you mean "infrastructure" or re-shoring of manufacturing? Are there plans to rebuild/repair/improve things like bridges and roads and such? To expand internet access? Or just the notion that tariffs will result in greatly increased manufacturing activity?
  • edited June 9
    DrVenture said:

    Sven said:

    ...

    Having said that, US government need to face the question on rebuilding the entire infrastructure from sourcing (raw materials) to manufacturing (finished products) of strategically critical materials domestically. ...

    Do you mean "infrastructure" or re-shoring of manufacturing? Are there plans to rebuild/repair/improve things like bridges and roads and such? To expand internet access? Or just the notion that tariffs will result in greatly increased manufacturing activity?
    The thread is about mining, processing, or recycling rare earth elements and magnets.

    And to add: Making sure there is a domestic market in case China decides to open the taps and flood the market, as they well could.
  • edited June 9
    Okay, so when you said "rebuilding the entire infrastructure" it was limited to rare Earth mining and production. IRT my post above, is there a reasonable expectation that recycling can have a significant, cost-effective impact on our rare Earth requirements? I have seen no data.

    I agree we need to be more rare Earth self-sufficient, in a responsible fashion. I assume that could take a lot of time/effort, But if done right, would be to our advantage. It appears that this issue was not considered thoroughly, when invoking large tariffs on China, I might add.
  • The semiconductor, electronics, defense, wind turbines (magnets), cars (especially EVs), and others. Many of these industries overlap due to dual-uses based on the specific applications. This should be a great starting point to recycle what is already concentrated raw materials. Now comes the separating individual metals and refining them to the required purity. These are high tech sectors that are continue to grow. Of course, China will flood the market so to kill off domestic production. Here is where the government can impose local sourcing of raw metals. Another approach is to use through World Trade Organization where the low balling tactics should be prohibited. Will this administration has the foresight to address this problem for this problem in the long term.
  • The semiconductor, electronics, defense, wind turbines (magnets), cars (especially EVs), and others. Many of these industries overlap due to dual-uses based on the specific applications. This should be a great starting point to recycle what is already concentrated raw materials. Now comes the separating individual metals and refining them to the required purity. These are high tech sectors that are continue to grow. Of course, China will flood the market so to kill off domestic production. Here is where the government can impose local sourcing of raw metals. Another approach is to use through World Trade Organization where the low balling tactics should be prohibited. Will this administration has the foresight to address this problem for this problem in the long term.

    With respect to recycling, there is always a cost associated with its lifecycle. Glass, commodity metals, and papers are commonly recycled. Plastics are not easily separated and recycled, and that they end up in landfills. My opinion is that rare earth metals should not be treated as consumables, and thus it represents an opportunity. Thus far the recycling process has yet to be demonstrated to be less than the raw earth minerals. One needs to consider the environmental cost associated with the process as well. Thus, the life cycle analysis needs to be examined systematically.
  • edited June 9
    Sven said:

    The semiconductor, electronics, defense, wind turbines (magnets), cars (especially EVs), and others. Many of these industries overlap due to dual-uses based on the specific applications. This should be a great starting point to recycle what is already concentrated raw materials. Now comes the separating individual metals and refining them to the required purity. These are high tech sectors that are continue to grow. Of course, China will flood the market so to kill off domestic production. Here is where the government can impose local sourcing of raw metals. Another approach is to use through World Trade Organization where the low balling tactics should be prohibited. Will this administration has the foresight to address this problem for this problem in the long term.

    This is a good point. China can make recycling cost prohibitive by flooding the market. Then the recycling effort may require government subsidies.

    And yes, the costs associated with recycling can be a severely limiting factor and make it unsustainable. The private sector does not invest in losing propositions. I am not sure China would ever actually adhere to WTO, other than lip-service, a phrase my father used to say. lol

    I would consider it a great win if rare Earth recycling was successful on a significant basis. I did find this from 2023 - seems like a lifetime ago:
    https://www.snexplores.org/article/recycling-rare-earth-elements-hard-reuse-greener-technology

    It is too much information to effectively cite from, but a good read. We appear to be at a point where we are recycling at a 1% rate of pre-used materials, but could hit 10% in a decade. I wonder if we "DOGE'd" everyone at the DOE Critical Minerals Institute, Yet?
  • I wonder if we "DOGE'd" everyone at the DOE Critical Minerals Institute, Yet?
    If that is the case, it would be a fatal mistake for this country to ensure national security. Question is does the current administration has the technical savvy and diplomacy to navigate this new challenges?

    A good example is refining weapon grade uranium and that was accomplished by American scientists, and NOT through some deal with the Soviet Union. I do think the outstanding refining challenges can be overcome.
  • In giving it more thought, I wonder if, at the current exponential rate of demand, getting to 10% recycling of rare Earth (in a decade) is a step backwards? Certainly restricting the best and brightest of foreign students entering our universities is not going to help with our domestic STEM deficiencies. Maybe we can license the tech from other countries, Canada maybe? lol - I jest --- or do I?
  • Those concerned about DOGE may want to look into whats happening to the Critical Materials Innovation Hub at Ames National Laboratory, which is also sponsoring research at Oak Ridge National Laboratory that was licensed by the Caldera Mine project in Missouri. https://www.ameslab.gov/cmi

    If anyone wants to keep up with what's happening with recycling today, well, I suggest Recycling Today. https://www.recyclingtoday.com/news/cyclic-materials-to-build-rare-earth-element-recycling-facility-in-mesa-arizona/


  • rforno said:

    WABAC said:

    It would be painful If China shut down REE trade completely. OTOH, their monopoly on production means they have to export enough to make it financially infeasible to motivate production/recycling in other countries. As it is, I think the cat is out of the bag.

    Probably why MP has shot up this past week or so.....
    Keep an eye on these guys if you like to get in early: https://calderausa.com/ OTOH, who know what the market will look like by the time they start thinking about an IPO.
Sign In or Register to comment.