Slashdot Mirror


China Considering Cuts In Rare-Earth Metal Exports

SillySnake sends in a report from the Telegraph on draft plans in China to restrict exports of rare earths. "Beijing is drawing up plans to prohibit or restrict exports of rare earth metals that are produced only in China and play a vital role in cutting edge technology, from hybrid cars and catalytic converters, to superconductors, and precision-guided weapons. A draft report by China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology has called for a total ban on foreign shipments of terbium, dysprosium, yttrium, thulium, and lutetium. Other metals such as neodymium, europium, cerium, and lanthanum will be restricted to a combined export quota of 35,000 tonnes a year, far below global needs."

24 of 456 comments (clear)

  1. The new "oil" by MasterOfGoingFaster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just what the world economy needs. A single-country "cartel" that will cause prices to greatly rise. This should be interesting to watch.

    I guess rare-earth metals are the new "oil".

    --
    Place nail here >+
    1. Re:The new "oil" by xerxesVII · · Score: 5, Funny

      Muslims?

      --
      "We shall grapple with the ineffable, and see if we may not eff it after all." - Douglas Adams
    2. Re:The new "oil" by Hurricane78 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uuum, what have the Chinese nationals to do with their asshole government? They are not their government. It's like punishing you for the murderings by the US Army in in Afghanistan and Iraq. Wouldn't you feel unfairly treated?

      Perhaps they even go to American schools to *avoid* "their" government.

      It's people with your mindset that create hatred against a whole nation for the fault of a few.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    3. Re:The new "oil" by srealm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is typical protectionist crap. Sorry, but you may be right about businesses thinking short term, but if America starts banning foreign nationals from its schools, and slapping tariffs on foreign imports, how does that make America any better than China?

      And for the record, America DOES still slap tariffs on foreign imports into this country. Usually at the behest of the powerful lobbies. Ever look at things like sugar and wheat imports? Both have either rather large tariffs, or just subsidies for the domestic industry. Why? Because the industry lobbies for those products demanded it. And it has caused a lot of friction with America's trading partners.

      Hell, I remember a 'free trade' agreement a few years ago with Australia where not only did America put tariffs on Australian wheat imports (because of pressure from the US wheat lobby), they also insisted as part of their free trade deal that Australia adopt something similar to the DMCA as part of the deal - at the behest of the RIAA/MPAA. So if you really believe America has been doing other countries a favor in it's trading practices (Food for Oil anyone? Or how about withholding aid money, which is supposed to be completely unrelated to trade), then you're deluded.

      In short, protectionism is bad no matter what. Now whether China is banning these exports because it truly doesn't have enough to satisfy domestic demand, and thus can't afford to supply foreign demand, or they're trying to use this threat to gain more concessions from the international community is irrelevant. Instituting protectionist policies won't help Sino-American relations, and considering, as you have said, America relies so heavily on China for it's manufacturing of almost everything we buy, America just can't afford to ruin it's relationship with yet another country, especially one it relies so heavily on.

      America used to be able to take the high moral ground, and used to be viewed in a generally favorable light in the world. It's America's own greed and arrogance (not to mention going around the world like a bull in a china shop sticking it's nose in everyone else's business) that has tarnished this reputation. The election of Obama has actually started to repair this a little, but only when America starts playing fair with the rest of the world again (ie. treating other countries as equals, as opposed to approaching each trade deal as a "we want this, give it to us or else you're not our friend anymore!" deal) will it actually gain respect again. You seem quick to cry 'foul!' when another country starts using the same tactics America has been using for decades against America. You (ie. America) wrote these new trading rules, don't be surprised when someone else plays by them.

    4. Re:The new "oil" by linzeal · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ok, mister xenophobe.

      Why shouldn't China be entitled to use its own resources to build out its own economy? China has a horrible standard of living for the amount of production present in the country and the pollution that goes along with it. I hope they use it all for domestic green energy projects, because frankly they need it more than we do where going "green" is more a luxury than anything. Building green jobs here with our own rare earths is entirely possible considering we have far more known rare earth ore deposits than they do. So what exactly are you complaining about, that we can't rape their country for all the resources? They have a billion people and it is highly unlikely they will ever have the same standard of living as the US in our lifetime but the very least we could do is not bitch and moan every time China does something nice for its own citizens.

      You know, I would rather deport people like you than hard working or studying immigrants. Why don't you all go down to the south of the US and secede, this time the rest of us northern folk won't stop you. Well considering there is hardly any natural resources in the south besides coal and oil you can all have your coal power plants and big trucks and you won't need to worry about new-fangled technologies irritating you. You can all live gloriously embittered lives scapegoating the rest of the world for your problems as you walk around yelling in the swamps, marshes and hurricane-prone areas of the gulf states like some sort of swamp curmudgeon. You could yourself America for Americans only or something. Build yourself a Lou Dobbsian wall around your entire country to keep Yankees and Mexicans out. Give all those janitorial, landscaping and construction jobs back to Americans because we all know how much Americans love doing menial labor for low wages without health insurance. Right, mister xenophobe?

  2. Update by Dingadong · · Score: 4, Funny

    Terrorists found in Beijing and Shanghai, U.S. Troops invade.

    1. Re:Update by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Funny

      China is the new economy. Western Europe is just on a downhill spiral.

      No. We are Willie Wonka. China is the Oompa Loompas.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    2. Re:Update by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I always make the argument, what if China decided one day to the next that 300 million (about a quarter of their country) decided to go for a walk and moved to the US via Alaska. Do you really think anybody could stop 300 million people? Answer NO!

      I don't think anyone really has to. There isn't enough food between China and Alaska, or between Alaska and CONUS, to feed 300 million people. So if the Chinese decided to do something like this, we could reasonably expect the one survivor to be completely unnoticed in the trail of 300,000,000 corpses along the way.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  3. Not a Great Analogy by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just what the world economy needs. A single-country "cartel" that will cause prices to greatly rise. This should be interesting to watch.

    I guess rare-earth metals are the new "oil".

    Some key points you may have missed from the article:

    Mr Stephens said China had put global competitors out of business in the early 1990s by flooding the market, leading to the closure of the biggest US rare earth mine at Mountain Pass in California - now being revived by Molycorp Minerals.

    So, if this goes through, we merely open the mine in California. I'll feel better about paying a higher price for something if it is created under tighter environmental regulations than what they have in China. Cheap labor and lack of an EPA and potential corrupted officials? Of course they can undercut California!

    Secondly a rare metals dealer in Australia said

    This isn't about the China holding the world to ransom. They are saying we need these resources to develop our own economy and achieve energy efficiency, so go find your own supplies.

    So your analogy is lacking in many ways. We can refine the metals here and China needs them for their own growing demand.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Not a Great Analogy by raddan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      On the other hand, cost drives innovation. As the article stated, it may take several years to bring the old rare-earth mines back into operation. In that time, we either pay more, or use our engineering degrees and come up with workarounds. I have a feeling that the latter may frequently be the case. For instance, if rare-earths are required to manufacture hard disk drives, SSDs (which I assume do not require these metals since they require no magnets) will probably become favorable.

      China's move may affect regular people but I suspect not. This is probably more important to you if you're in manufacturing or trade.

    2. Re:Not a Great Analogy by jonbryce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or alternatively we buy our hard drives from Chinese manufacturers, which I think is what they want to happen..

    3. Re:Not a Great Analogy by lambent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Our oil fields are not dry. Our demand outstrips domestic production. It's just easier to buy refined oil from other countries. The bottleneck has been our craptacular refineries for some decades, now.

      We have lots of choices of where to get oil, including the choice to stop using oil. It's just easier to pay someone else to do it for us.

      I assume the same is true of these rare earth metals.

    4. Re:Not a Great Analogy by hany · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or alternatively we buy our hard drives from Chinese manufacturers, which I think is what they want to happen..

      ... and "mine" those Chinese hard-drives for this rare materials to manufacture our own hard drives. :)

      --
      hany
    5. Re:Not a Great Analogy by cats-paw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll feel better about paying a higher price for something if it is created under tighter environmental regulations than what they have in China. Cheap labor and lack of an EPA and potential corrupted officials? Of course they can undercut California!

      Isn't this the problem ? There is no such thing as "free trade". We're all Ferengi now, the profit is what's important. The mine should have not been allowed to close in the first place. It's ridiculous to say companies have to compete when the competition is an autocratic country with no environmental laws and other "advantages".

      And no, the answer is not to weaken our environmental laws, that's called the race to the bottom, and I don't want to run in that race.

      Child labor, lack of environmental laws, repressive regimes, none of it matters when it comes to "free trade".

      --
      Absolute statements are never true
    6. Re:Not a Great Analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Frankly, I miss the days of over-engineered machines built of inferior materials.

      I have wood working machines from the early 1900's that are more durable, accurate, and mammoth than the cheap plastic shit you buy today.

      Funny thing is, they still work. Like new.

      If this means we actually start over-engineering and building things to -last- again, I'm all for it.

    7. Re:Not a Great Analogy by BlueStrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not dry, but not nearly enough to supply us. If we stopped importing oil and relied on just our remaining oil, we wouldn't even be able to power the country for a year.

      Well then, we need to tell the environmental groups to shut up and start drilling in ANWAR and the Gulf of Mexico where there were new huge deposits just discovered and in all the other places where they scream either about some lizard, worm, fish, or where they're completely talking out of their ass like with Caribou in Alaska which absolutely love pipelines, etc. Their numbers skyrocket because of the favorable conditions. We also need to tell the NIMBY crowd tough toodles too.

      I'm sick to death of the people who scream bloody murder about domestic oil drilling while expecting society to provide them with a lifestyle, technology, and consumer goods & services that demand we do things they protest about. You can't have it both ways. TANSTAAFL.

      Technology and our knowledge & skills have advanced and we can now drill with far, far less impact than in the '60s, or even the '90s. The same goes for mining.

      Resource infrastructure is really where the US is lacking and what drives the US to engage in much of the types of foreign-policy nastiness so many dislike in order to obtain what our modern society needs to sustain itself while refusing to pay the price ourselves. There are resources the country *must* have to sustain itself and our lifestyles.

      If we prevent those resources from being obtained domestically, then we'll have to live with making nice with countries that abuse their people, trample freedom, are militarily aggressive, support terrorism, and want to harm the US & the West in general. And who, by the way, also don't give a crap how much they pollute the planet. We just end up outsourcing our pollution and enable bad people to do bad things.

      At least if we're drilling in ANWAR, the Gulf, and offshore in California, or mining in California and elsewhere domestically, we can limit the environmental impact which won't happen if we're getting our resources from China, the Middle East, and elsewhere.

      We can mitigate our oil consumption to an extent, but it will realistically take 3 to 5 decades to make a truly significant impact unless we are prepared to allow many people to suffer and many to die unnecessary deaths. We will still need large amounts of oil to sustain plastics, medicines, etc even if we reduce transportation-related uses significantly.

      Or, alternatively, we can just keep whining about domestic oil drilling and domestic mining, in which case little will change except for things getting worse.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    8. Re:Not a Great Analogy by ZekoMal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not against drilling; drill away. The problem is that there isn't enough; even if we just started drilling in every spot we could, we wouldn't have enough. It's. Not. Sustainable. Every time we find a new pocket of oil, everybody falls silent and slows down work on alternative energy. Look at our alternative energy options: all of them rely on oil in some way. We have no plans, and drilling to fix our oil problems is so short term that it's laughable.

  4. Reciprocal regulations by valinor89 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think that if they do so they won't mind if we ( as in the other western countries) put prohibitions and restrictions of our own in other product importations. We could revive our cloth, electrodomestic, chemical, (whatever) old industries. It might be a bit expensive at first (mostly for those multinationals ) but then we can be sure of better occupation rates. I's a shame that this is only wishfull thinking...

    1. Re:Reciprocal regulations by khchung · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It does not even make sense! China restricts exports and you propose retaliation by restricting imports?!

      I assume you live in US (who else always talked about reviving local industries?), do you even know how many export restrictions there are in the US? Crypto, high-tech stuff, whatever vaguely related to "national security", you name it.

      All countries (except those that have already became a vassal state of the US) restricts exports of critical resources, and this is allowed in WTO treaties. Examples from countries all over the world include restricting natural resources, science & technology, and even critical infrastructure (you do know that US blocked a company from buying the operations of the Panama Canal for "national security" reasons?).

      Only in /. would this non-news story becomes news worthy to make the front page.

      --
      Oliver.
  5. Re:Will somebody in the WTO finally grow a pair by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fat chance. The US and Western Europe are indeed addicted to the unsustainably cheap supply of Chinese credit and cheap labor. We effectively wink at them gobbling up global resources so they can be churned through a cheap labor pool and nonexistent health/safety regimens in order to satiate our desire for a high standard of living at minimal cost. China never had any real intention to abide by the WTO's rules and viewed membership as a national pride issue. Don't hold your breath waiting for China to alter its behavior even if the WTO adds some stank to their toothless regulations.

  6. Cash for Rare Earth Metals Program by Maltheus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe they're getting tired of exchanging their wealth for our paper. I admire the way China is focused like a laser on their infrastructure and the acquisition of raw materials, while we're busy making up new problems to solve as a way of avoiding the very serious ones we already have. Perhaps if we focused on production, rather than consumption, we might have a little extra wealth to spend on our own decaying infrastructure.

  7. Oil refining capacity by Paua+Fritter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually the bottleneck has been the impossibility of bringing additional refining capacity online in the US.

    True. And actually this isn't just the case in the USA; there are virtually no new refineries anywhere in the world.

    But actually the main hurdle isn't the NIMBY syndrome or over-regulation - it's a simple matter of return on investment. No-one wants to build a refinery because they take a long time to build, and a long time to recoup your investment, and the world's oil supply is known to be running out. Globally, oil-fields are now considered to be at peak production levels; that's to say, it's unlikely that there will ever be more oil being pumped than there is today. So building new refining capacity is a poor investment. Instead, people are just making do with what there is. That's why Iran is now importing refined petroleum from Venezuela.

  8. Re:Woo-hoo - by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do you really expect a country that at least used to charge families for the bullets used to execute family members to act in a humanitarian way?

  9. Re:Woo-hoo - by MrNaz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Revenge? It's not revenge. It's their resources, they can CHOOSE to sell it to us, or they can CHOOSE to hoard it for their own use, or they can CHOOSE to turn it into a life sized replica of the pyramids just because they can. That's the nature of it being THEIRS.

    Looking at the history of things like rubber, tea, diamonds and oil, it would seem that we are not aware that we have no God given right to the resources of others, no matter how much we tell ourselves we need it for our survival. Has UK/US historical foreign policy gotten that far into the public mindset that we now get all angsty and self-righteous whenever some country decides that they need their resources more than we need their resources? Seriously people, if we're going to think this way and then acquiesce to the military being used to go fetch those resources and destroy the other country in the process, then lets at least not act all surprised when they get fed up and fly planes into our buildings.

    --
    I hate printers.