US Seeks To Challenge China's Electric-Vehicle Supply Chain Dominance (reuters.com) 137
A U.S. senator plans to introduce legislation on Thursday to streamline regulation and permitting requirements for the development of mines for lithium, graphite and other electric-vehicle supply chain minerals, part of a plan to offset China's dominance in the space. From a report: While Tesla, Volkswagen and other electric-focused automakers and battery manufacturers are expanding in the United States, they are reliant on mineral imports without a major push to develop more domestic mines and processing facilities.
U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski, the Alaska Republican who is chair of the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told Reuters she will introduce the Minerals Security Act alongside Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat. "Our challenge is still a failure to understand the vulnerability we are in as a nation when it comes to reliance on others for our minerals," Murkowski said.
U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski, the Alaska Republican who is chair of the Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told Reuters she will introduce the Minerals Security Act alongside Senator Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat. "Our challenge is still a failure to understand the vulnerability we are in as a nation when it comes to reliance on others for our minerals," Murkowski said.
Musk's ultimate master plan revealed (Score:4, Funny)
Step 1:
Form company with expertise in "Mole Vehicles" if you will, that can drill under and through anything.
Step 2:
Get regulations changed to allow mining for strategic (read: valuable) minerals across the U.S.
Strep 3:
Literally ROLL into profit! No hidden step!
Was the Gigafactory built atop a huge secret lithium reserve? You decide!
Re: (Score:3)
Our challenge is still a failure to understand the vulnerability we are in as a nation when it comes to reliance on others for our minerals," Murkowski said.
So how about you start making friends instead of warmongering and building walls?
Re: (Score:1)
First off, The Eejit is against starting wars because it would cost money that he would rather spend on building the Great White Wall. It is worrying that his lap dog Bolton is a "kill'em all, they aren't Americans" kind of guy and the Eejit is very impressionable. Still, it would take money from the Great White Wall and any other re-election gambits he has in mind.
Re making friends, the Eejit doesn't understand the concept. He's not the U.S., but he likes to play one on TV.
Re: (Score:1)
So how about you start making friends instead of warmongering and building walls?
Awesome facts!
But remember, Teagaggers are immune to facts!
Re: Musk's ultimate master plan revealed (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Its great that you lash out online. We can all tell its because you wouldn't actually hurt a fly, and someone has done something to you that makes you want to beat them up. If only you could find the heart.
Cobalt? (Score:5, Informative)
Cobalt is what keeps Tesla's supply chain management awake at night, yet not mentioned.
Also, what about rare earth elements?
Why do I suspect that this has more to do with potential Lithium mines in Alaska and West Virginia than any mythical supply chain issues?
Re: (Score:3)
Cobalt is what keeps Tesla's supply chain management awake at night
Right, 7 million tons of worldwide reserves (half in Congo) being produced at 120 thousand tons per year.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> Right, 7 million tons of worldwide reserves (half in Congo) being produced at 120 thousand tons per year.
Congo has been in state a low-intensity civil war for more or less 60 years by now (i.e. ever since white colonial rule of black Africa has ended in 1960). Because of that problem large-scale industrial exploitation of mineral resources cannot take place, as rebels come out of the jungle, set the gear on fire in a suprise attack and retreat, we don't even know wht they want. Some are religious cults
Re:Cobalt? (Score:5, Insightful)
Cobalt is easily scalable if needed. It's just going to have to get more expensive so separating it from massive nickel production that already exists becomes more profitable. Amount needed in batteries is comparatively small, so impact of price increase on battery production is going to be small. Rare earths just need repealing of certain environmental protection laws, something that will happen overnight if actual need arises. Like cobalt, Rare earths are overwhelmingly a byproduct of already existing mining activity. They're just extremely toxic to separate.
Lithium is a bottleneck in pricing. To simplify it to the extreme, South American deserts are limited in what they can evaporate per time, which means that much more expensive mining will have to be restarted to pick up the slack.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The Entire push for electric xars become self-defeating.
Oh great. Now there's a new pronoun for four-wheeled vehicles. This shit's getting out of hand. Worse, they also sexually identify as attack helicopters.
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why modern green movement works the way it does, being an antithesis of actually protecting the environment. It is choke full of people like you, who don't even understand the difference between "small" things like localized pollution vs global effects.
So you end up with utter insanity of your statement, "increasing local pollution means we might as well abandon our efforts to combat global environmental problems".
Re: (Score:2)
IIRC, neodymium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium [wikipedia.org] is one of the more critical ones- mostly for permanent magnets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Cobalt? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Model S is moving to Model 3s, which uses REM magnets.
REM magnets? I feel like I'm losing my religion. (ba-dump)
But seriously, what is an REM magnet? I can't find anything interesting online...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you, the REM didn't click in for me. Yes, rare earth, neodymium is one of the REM, and afaik the most important in these super magnets. Yes, I've seen / read a bit that there are efforts underway to improve them further, and to try to use less neodymium and other scarce / difficult to obtain raw materials.
A side note, that I can say about many things, is how much super magnet material is tossed into landfills, maybe even incinerated, in discarded computers, hard drives, power tools, etc Seems stupi
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, my post was meant in a global (no pun intended) scope- not just referencing Tesla. A year or two ago 60 Minutes did a story on neodymium, showed a gargantuan mine in CA that produces almost no Nd and at a huge cost. And that most Nd comes from China, putting us (USA) at risk, and that the Chinese have infamously cut off exports to Japan in 2010, and they could do that to us.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Cobalt? None issue (Score:2)
lithium is what concerns Tesla.
Not about supply chain security (Score:5, Informative)
In other words, China is not the reason for this bill.
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, China is not the reason for this bill.
Really? So nothing about rare earths?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Not about supply chain security (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The US is currently a net exporter of oil.
I think that's was point. We used to (and still do) heavily depend on oil imports and that turned out bad when a foreign cartel decided to use that leverage to harm us. Since then we've boosted domestic production and are much less vulnerable to foreign coercion.
The honorable senator from Alaska wants to (or at least says she wants to) avoid the same situation with lithium, namely having the supply of a commodity which is crucial to our economy be controlled by a hostile foreign government. On it's face, I
Re: (Score:2)
The US is currently a net exporter of oil.
Maybe you need to refresh your rhetoric.
Hold your horses pardner. No the US is not, yet (but may be soon). Here is a convenient table of the weekly petroleum net imports (crude and refined combined) for the last 18 years. [eia.gov] If you peruse that table you will find exactly one week out of the nearly 1000 weeks listed where there was a negative net import (i.e. net export) which was the week ending Feb. 22 of this year (the 4 week average has never gone negative yet). I will bet that you heard a report hyping that one week, and figured it was now the n
Re: Not about supply chain security (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Israel had nothing to do with it. Iraq was invaded because Dick Cheney still had a boner from the first gulf war and Bush's daddy was considered to have lost the war when he sold out the Shi'ites in S. Iraq to Saddam's tender loving care. Afghanistan seemed so easy and anyone who knew the area told the Bush Administration don't do Iraq, it won't be easy. But Cheney got his war and now we live with the aftermath.
Mind you Iraq was always going to be a problem with or without Saddam. The Islamists were on the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We don't need Israel for anything
Unless the "we" are American politicians hungry for campaign contributions.
"Streamline regulation" (Score:2, Insightful)
This is a bill to allow more mining, the supply chain is just an excuse.
Worse than that - "streamline regulation" is code words for "throw all environmental and safety concerns out the window so that mining companies can do whatever they want to boost their bottom line."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty much always in favor of deregulating, even if its for a narrow interest.
Which is to say your narrow interest, and fuck everybody else.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is to say your narrow interest, and fuck everybody else.
No, I don't own an electric car, I don't mine lithium, I don't work for a battery company. I have very little interest or personal stake in lithium or batteries. I still think deregulating lithium mining is a good idea. I trust markets more than I trust regulators to figure out who should be doing what.
How to win with the supply chain (Score:4, Interesting)
2. Who can further work the products into the parts needed to make great new electric vehicles.
3. Can make an actual electric-vehicle at a low cost with parts that don't support any Communist nation.
4. Work with Taiwan, the real China.
5. Send out US experts to nations that like the USA and see what minerals they can export.
6. Secure the production from mineral production to US electric-vehicle design.
Like when the US actually stopped working directly with Communist nations and did some work in great nations that supported freedom and the USA.
Re: (Score:3)
Like when the US actually stopped working directly with Communist nations and did some work in great nations that supported freedom and the USA.
These two are mutually exclusive these days.
Re: (Score:1)
For the USA and the nation with the exports the USA wants for electric vehicle production?
Stop doing détente. Support Taiwan and support freedom. Stop funding Communist nations.
Grant most-favored-nation status only to nations that actually support and like the USA.
The next part is to work with friendly nations. Expand their export and quality control.
Roads, ports, rail, power, new investment at where the minerals are. Better working conditions. A clinic, educa
Re: (Score:2)
Lets try mutually beneficial then?
Then why not China? The real China, not the Taiwanese rump.
Re: (Score:3)
Here let me fix this for you;
1. Find out who has the skill to mine and work with the raw materials needed in nations friendly to the USA.
2. Conduct regime change operation to put in corrupt politicians.
2. Get corrupt politician to establish autocratic regime that favour US corporations.
3.Kill all those who protest the ruthless exploitation of resource and labour in their country
4.Maximum profit, the USA has no allies, just gullible fools waiting to be ruthlessly exploited, their resources plundered and thei
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does any nation really support the USA?
I don't mean that in a nasty way, like they hate the US or something. But the US is in full America First mode, so obviously every other country is not looking for a partnership or mutually fair deal, they are all looking to get the most they can and be on guard for bad deals.
The days of long term thinking and cooperation are... Maybe not over, but suspended at least.
Re: (Score:1)
The people of the nice nations remember that and are thankful for that support.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vs the small minority that have any power at all in socialist or dictator oligarchies? BTW, Maduro is asking you to get off your computer and run over some more civilian protestors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At the same time we remove fossil fuels (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll take that bargain.
Most of the West Coast is aiming for 100 percent Renewable Portfolio Standard by 2025 or 2040, so if we just cancel all tax exemptions, tax exclusions, tax deductions, and tax incentives for all fossil fuels and fossil fuel infrastructure, that would easily pay for the US to do a Moon Shot program to achieve export dominance in all-electric cars and trucks. My fave is the 410 mile range Rivian truck, but most 2019 electric vehicles being sold in California and B.C. get about a 400 mile range using their batteries.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
...so if we just cancel all tax exemptions, tax exclusions, tax deductions, and tax incentives for all fossil fuels and fossil fuel infrastructure, that would easily pay for the US to do a Moon Shot program...
I hear that sort of statement all the time but never any follow up detail. Could you explain what that favorable tax treatment is and give us some numbers about the magnitudes? And could you compare that with tax treatments other industries might get? Thanks. I personally have no idea what those special treatments are and how much they're worth. I couldn't even tell you if they're measured in zeros, millions, billions, or trillions.
Let me be specific about the industry specificity bit. For example, all comp
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Good point.
We should also remove all corporate tax depreciation allowances for all fossil fuel vehicles or infrastructure purchased after 2019.
I for one don't think we need incentives for electric vehicles per se, just remove all such for fossil fuel infrastructure and vehicles. If you want to keep your 1912 Ford Truck, cool. Just don't get any favorable tax treatment for it of any sort.
Re: (Score:3)
We should also remove all corporate tax depreciation allowances for all fossil fuel vehicles or infrastructure purchased after 2019... Just don't get any favorable tax treatment for it of any sort.
I think you miss my point. Companies get to depreciate all their capital assets: cars, trucks, electric vehicles, solar panels, everything. They're considered a cost and we tax companies on profits (that is, revenue minus costs). The only funny business, if that's what it is, is the amount they get to depreciate every year. Some things depreciate over three years, because in theory they are worn out and useless after three years. Other things depreciate over 20 years because that's how long they are useful.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People should be able to do the same thing regarding depreciation.
Are you saying I should be able to reduce my taxable income by depreciating the value of my car? I suppose you could go this route, it seems complicated. I know depreciation is one of the reasons we have armies of tax accountants working for corporations. It's a very complicated part of the corporate tax return.
I'm not a student of tax history but I think that's close to what we did prior to the income tax simplifications up to the '80s. There used to be all sorts of tax deductions for various costs one wou
Re: (Score:2)
As I said, if we have depreciation for fossil fuel vehicles and infrastructure after 2019, it's a subsidy of them.
Therefore, we need to remove it. Let's say you bought a tractor in 2018, with a 3 year depreciation. We wouldn't affect that. But if you bought a fossil fuel tractor in 2020, there would be zero depreciation allowed, zero incentives, zero maintenance expensing. It's on you that you chose to purchase it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, didn't miss it at all. I'm not a great fan of any subsidies, since they tend to then continue into perpetuity. However, most of these EV credits are sunset once they achieve 5-10 percent of the market for their vehicle, or a period of 5 years, so they do go away.
In actual fact, the roads in my city are built from license fees (which all vehicles pay) and mostly property taxes, gas taxes are only one of the subsidies for state and federal highways and access ramps and bridges for them.
It's 2019, not 1
Re: (Score:2)
12.5% royalty
Re: (Score:2)
My fave is the 410 mile range Rivian truck
The layout of the Rivian suggests the designer(s) are still thinking in terms of internal combustion; it's cool looks represent nothing more than seriously-untapped inefficiencies.
Re: (Score:2)
Let China run out first (Score:2)
There's no hurry. It can stay in the ground a few more years.
Coal fly ash (Score:2)
The problem is not supply chain (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The lack of domestic production would be why legislation might seek to encourage it. The U.S. does have lithium production, from a brine deposit in Nevada. The Salton Sea geothermal field in California is a reserve of 2 million tons, 10% of the entire world demand projected over the next century.