US Sits On Supply of Rare, Tech-Crucial Minerals 324
We've recently discussed China's position as the linchpin of the world's supply of rare earths, and their rumblings about restricting exports of of these materials crucial to the manufacture of everything from batteries to wind turbines. Now an anonymous reader sends this MSNBC piece on the status of the US's supply of rare earths. "China supplies most of the rare earth minerals found in technologies such as hybrid cars, wind turbines, computer hard drives, and cell phones, but the US has its own largely untapped reserves that could safeguard future tech innovation. Those reserves include deposits of both 'light' and 'heavy' rare earths... 'There is already a shortage, because there are companies that already can't get enough material,' said Jim Hedrick, a former USGS rare earth specialist who recently retired. 'No one [in the US] wants to be first to jump into the market because of the cost of building a separation plant,' Hedrick explained. ... [S]uch a plant requires thousands of stainless steel tanks holding different chemical solutions to separate out all the individual rare earths. The upfront costs seem daunting. Hedrick estimated that opening just one mine and building a new separation plant might cost anywhere from $500 million to $1 billion and would require a minimum of eight years. [But the CEO of a rare earth supply company said] 'From what I see, security of supply is going to be more important than the prices.'"
No one's thinking long term anymore (Score:3, Interesting)
For the same reason they aren't drilling for oil off the coasts. You know, if you don't start now, it's going to take even LONGER before production is spun up. And by then, we'll have yet another dumb ass in office and we can't mine this stuff out for whatever reason (NIMBY, clean air, whatever). Even if the company stockpiles it, the material is still an asset and can be used when the Chinese decide to close their borders because of another cultural revolution.
More than a short term supply problem (Score:3, Interesting)
One thing that does not seem to be talked about much is that all rare earth metals will be completely depleted, in any practically extractable reserves, within the next 50-100 years. The response to the shortage of rare earth metals seen here is similar to a fishing fleet who is pushing the fish population to total extinction through overfishing, doubling the number of fishing boats in order to make up production decline... it only speeds up the extinction process, and that repeatedly we see fishing industries opposing any efforts to allow fish populations to rebound, thus dooming destruction of the very fish population being fished, forever. This is short sighted thinking, it is far easier to carry on business as usual for fisherman even though the species is going extinct, in the short term, in the long term that behaviour leads to a much worse outcome.
A difference with these metals is they cannot regenerate. Once they are gone, thats it. Still today metals are being used like its an endless supply, and people throw away everything from electronics to batteries which contian precious metals. In the process, we are throwing away our future. Knowing this one realises that with all environmental and resource issues, recycling is not a joke, and the people who have been pushing for it desperately are not "environmental nutjobs", they understand what is really going on and the true ramifications. I find this is true with nearly all environmental issues which are often ignored by the vested interests from pollution which threatens to severely damage our health adn well being to resource depletion.
The concerns over metal are also existing for oil as well, which is now predicted to peak as soon as 2014, that is a question of when, not if.
Re:Supply and demand? (Score:3, Interesting)
Seeing as demand for rare earths far outstrips supply, I don't think your explanation holds water. Even given the unfair trade advantage China holds by not upholding environmental standards, a US supplier could make a huge profit. Also, given that this story comes from a rare earths company, if environmental issues were a factor, you would have heard their whining. Plenty of new mines have opened up in the US. Heck, we're stripping the tops off of most of the Appalachians as we speak. I sincerely doubt that any of this has to do with our entirely reasonable and responsible environmental laws.
Re:More than a short term supply problem (Score:4, Interesting)
Landfill: A future mine.
Let's channel Frank Spedding (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Let's channel Frank Spedding (Score:1, Interesting)
If by 'near Offutt AFB' you mean 3 hours away from, then I suppose you are right.
Ames Laboratory is in Ames, IA at Iowa State University. See http://www.ameslab.gov/ for more info.
Re:Supply and demand? (Score:3, Interesting)
Insofar as dirty water and dirty air move from one state to the next, Congress has explicit power to regulate under the interstate commerce clause. Insofar as it is impractical to regulate interstate movement of dirty air and dirty water without regulating the intrastate production of such, Congress has explicit power under the "necessary and proper" clause. (Both of Article I, Section 8.)
Re:No one's thinking long term anymore (Score:1, Interesting)
Your argument makes no sense even on its face.
"...the oil is not just there. "
"The idea that we can solve our problems with domestic drilling is a lie told by the public relations of the Oil Industry and Republican puppets."
If there's no oil, then no company will go drill there. Oh, and why is China buying up all the rights to drill off Cuba?
Re:Last amended in 1992. (Score:3, Interesting)
When was the last time we had an amendment that actually impacted the operation of government?
Amendment 27 just deals with legislators not granting themselves immediate pay raises. This amendment is nowhere near the scale of what OP is suggesting. It's addressing an administrative detail, not a critical issue.
Since when is the law black and white? You're deluding yourself if you think it's so simple. It's open to interpretation, and if I choose a loose interpretation, that is my perogative. It's open to debate in the form of cases before the court... if the law were black-and-white, we wouldn't need lawyers and judges.
Just or unjust, whether you agree or disagree with me, the truth of the matter is that the law is exactly what we make of it. And what we've made of it is a fuzzy mess that you can put a fine point on... but so can your opposition.
I'm not advocating disregard of the law... I'm advocating understanding that the law must be mutable, that our Constitutional process for changing the law is broken (through lack of use), and thus should not be held as a requirement for action. Because inaction through lack of a useful channel for authorization is, in many cases, worse than taking action outside the scope of the Constitution.
Note that I think we still need to use the Constitution as a guiding document, and should do our best to only deviate when necessary. It's just that getting ANY meaningful amendment to the Constitution passed is impossible. Our stupid 15-second-soundbite politics have killed our ability to have meaningful political dialogue on a national stage.
Advanced Automation for Space Missions... (Score:3, Interesting)
I predict within twenty years or so, you can do this kind of separation in your backyard. Rare Earths are actually pretty common. Some people who realize that may not want to put in all the money for a conventional plant?
Meanwhile, the US spends a trillion dollars a year of "defense". But can't be bothered to have a plant in the country to produce strategic materials... What an odd notion of "security".
If you're going to bother to set up such a complex extraction facility, why not go all the way, for exactly the reasons you outline? This sort of process talked about around 1980 can extract and separate anything in there from regular old rock or seawater:
"Advanced Automation for Space Missions"
http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/ [islandone.org]
"Flowsheet and process equations for the HF acid-leach process"
http://www.islandone.org/MMSG/aasm/AASM5E.html#f541 [islandone.org]
The chemistry was thought doable even then. Look at the things they worried about being infeasible back then: "If each of the 13 sector components is as complex as the HF acid leach system (certainly a gross overestimate), then the total computer control capability required is about 6 megabytes or 9.4X10e7 bits using 16-bit words."
I have far more than that capacity on my cell phone...
The problem is that in the USA, all these industrial processes are separated due to the logic of the "free market", so no one can plan comprehensive materials extraction, production, and recycling facilities of the sort NASA was envisioning thirty years ago...
But no, the USA has to make plans to attack China (to the cost of trillions if the USA was so foolish) to keep them in line because there are not enough "rare earths" around...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_earth_element [wikipedia.org]
"The term "rare earth" arises from the rare earth minerals from which they were first isolated, which were uncommon oxide-type minerals (earths) found in Gadolinite extracted from one mine in the village of Ytterby, Sweden. However, with the exception of the highly-unstable promethium, rare earth elements are found in relatively high concentrations in the earth's crust, with cerium being the 25th most abundant element in the earth's crust at 68 parts per million."
Do you ever get the feeling somebody is just laughing at us?