The Good Earth

by wj 

"Rare earths" (lanthanide elements) are not particularly rare.  What they are is quite difficult to separate and refine, because they are so similar.  But there are differences, and those differences are critical is determining which one will work well (or at all) in any particular technical application. 

Once upon a time, perhaps half a century ago, the US was the main producer of refined rare earths.  Then China started producing them, and far less expensively that the US.  American producers couldn't compete.  And, frankly, didn't try very hard.  At this point, China is the world's main supplier of rare earths.  And the sole supplier of several of the heaviest ones. 

Why do we care?  Because some of those high tech applications are critical to our economy.  For example, for minor bits of manufacturing like semiconductor chips, which we are working to produce more of domestically.  But perhaps more to the point, especially for the bellicose right, they are used in various bits of military hardware.  For example, a nuclear submarine uses about four tons for each sub.  Which, currently, have to be imported from China.  (No idea whether those are exempt from the current flurry of tariffs -- although I rather doubt it.  It's just too technical for the current administration to wrap their heads around.)

As noted, rare earths are not particularly rare.  The US could take up producing them again.  The problem is, we couldn't do so quickly.  Even making the safe assumption that environmental regulations would be ignored (rare earth factories tend to be rather polluting), there is the problem that smelters to refine them are nothing like off-the-shelf items.  We're talking years to get one up and running -- even if a competent administration was expediting that. 

Of course, there are lots of other places where a trade war with China will hurt.  China does have its own economic challenges, but it is far better placed to weather them than the US is.  Both because the Trump administration is a long ways from achieving its ambition to create a totalitarian state, and because what the US supplies to China is available from alternative sources.  Perhaps not as cheaply, but definitely available.  The question is, how quickly will Trump cave? 

Open Thread

Comments

[Snarki, child of Loki]

Four tons per sub?
Makes me wonder "which lanthanides"?

Gadolinium?
Dysprosium?

[Hartmut]

Cerium is always needed (but it's the easiest to obtain and used to be the most commonly used).
Europium.
I assume those used for strong permanent magnets are the most important ones (also in weight).

[Michael Cain]

Poking around the internet this morning, it seems that military-grade radar and sonar require hundreds/thousands of pounds of rare-earth magnets. The newest US ballistic missile subs will use an ~50 MW electric drive using permanent magnet motors. Plus generators that are larger than that. All those magnets translate into lots of neodymium or samarium.

Tangentially, Greenland is supposed to have the largest undeveloped reserves of neodymium.

[JanieM]

Tangentially

Michael, comedy will be your next career, right?

[Michael Cain]

We're talking years to get one up and running...

Hypothetically...

The US government made the formal decision in July 1942 that a fission bomb was theoretically feasible. In July 1945 the first one was detonated in New Mexico. The Manhattan Project spent $27B (in 2023 dollars) over 1942-1946; that's about 4% of DoD's annual budget today. The Manhattan Project had to invent their way through multiple major problems; refining and separating rare earth elements is a solved problem. The Manhattan Project and follow-ons trashed the environment on a lot of federal lands; some of those have never been cleaned up. The BNSF and UP have huge amounts of unused long-haul capacity because coal use has dropped dramatically. We know where to dig. If Congress decided to do it, in a year we could be digging ore from various places, shipping it by rail to the Nevada Test Site, and producing all the rare earths the military needs there. Or all the rare-earth magnets they need if that's more convenient.

[JanieM]

Somehow I don't see the current iteration of the US government duplicating the speed and competence of the Manhattan Project. I mean, among their specialties are firing competent people and undermining science, so....

[Michael Cain]

@JanieM
Interesting (to me, from logistics) the large majority of the money spent by the Manhattan Project was spent by the Army Corps of Engineers. Today, it seems unlikely that either Congress (or the executive branch) would think in terms of using the Corps that way: "General, take this $50B and make us self-sufficient in rare earth elements. Keep things reasonably tidy. I expect to see production running in 12 months."

[GftNC]

I mean, among their specialties are firing competent people and undermining science

Janie got there first!

From today's Times, headlined "Trump brain drain starts global tug-of-war for the best science minds":

It is, said the president of the Australian Academy of Science, an “urgent and unparalleled opportunity” to grab the best US minds for Australia. The president of Nanyang Technological University in Singapore agrees, but thinks the chaos in US academia is, instead, a “golden opportunity” for Asian universities.

Au contraire, says President Macron of France. As his country’s universities launch programmes of “scientific asylum” for researchers fleeing the US, the time is right, he says, to “Choose France for Science”.

Perhaps not since the victorious Allies competed to entice Germany’s best scientists in 1945 has there been such overt competition to nab a country’s intellectual human capital.

But, says Sir John Bell, the head of Britain’s Ellison Institute of Technology, there’s probably no need to be greedy. If he is to be believed, such is the atmosphere in US academia that there will soon be enough scientific refugees to go round for everyone. “I’ve got the best guys in the best universities in America all saying, ‘When can we move?’” he said.

[JanieM]

@Michael Cain -- that is interesting indeeed.

I wouldn't be surprised if Clickbait doesn't even know the Army Corps of Engineers exists. In any case, it isn't exempt from the efforts of his wrecking crew.

First google result in response to "has the army corps of engineers been affected by doge".

[wj]

Today, it seems unlikely that either Congress (or the executive branch) would think in terms of using the Corps that way: "General, take this $50B and make us self-sufficient in rare earth elements. Keep things reasonably tidy. I expect to see production running in 12 months."

First, they'd need to find a sufficiently telegenic general. Telegenic and politically correct, i.e. a Trump worshiper. Second, they'd have to figure out how to create Trump's personal rake-off. Third, they'd need to find a private company to contract for the expertise, all of the in-house experts having been purged. Forth, they'd need to insulate the whole thing from the DOGE fiasco.

In theory, all that could should be possible. But not with this crew.

[CharlesWT]

If Congress decided to do it, in a year we could be digging ore from various places, shipping it by rail to the Nevada Test Site, and producing all the rare earths the military needs there.

With current regulations, the required environmental impact statements, and lawsuits, it would likely take a decade to open any new mines.

[russell]

Somehow I don't see the current iteration of the US government duplicating the speed and competence of the Manhattan Project.

xAI will do it! Everything is computer!

;)

[wj]

xAI will do it! Everything is computer!

First, AI generates virtual rare earths. Which it then uses to create virtual weapons. And with those weapins, it wins computer games. Our electrons can beat your electrons!

Meanwhile, in the real world.... (Not that Ukraine would mind if their war with Russia was all virtual.)

[Hartmut]

With current regulations, the required environmental impact statements, and lawsuits, it would likely take a decade to open any new mines.

Which is the one thing the current gang would just ignore or even delight in defecating on. If anything they'd complain, if the environment got not ruined enough.

[wj]

xkcd is getting downright political
https://xkcd.com/3081/

[Michael Cain]

With current regulations, the required environmental impact statements, and lawsuits, it would likely take a decade to open any new mines.

Note my qualifier, "If Congress decided to do it"... If Congress decides we need a rare earths national reserve for security purposes, produced in-country, EISs and lawsuits are gone. Particularly if everything but transport happens on federal lands.

[CharlesWT]

"If Congress decided to do it"...

A huge IF. The Founders intended Congress to be first among equals. But it has been shirking its duties and responsibilities for decades. Instead, members prefer continuous campaigning and long-winded speeches on C-SPAN to empty chambers. Don't expect them to change any time soon.

[GftNC]

Frank Luntz (may his name be cursed, but still) in today's Times:

Part 1

America’s top pollster: What Trump voters think now surprises me
Frank Luntz says the new political reality of the US — and the world — can be summarised in one word.

Few have spent more time than Frank Luntz trying to understand what drives fervent support for President Trump and what his presidency means for the future.

Fresh from his latest focus group with supporters of the president, held in advance of Trump’s 100th day back in office on Tuesday, the veteran political analyst has made his verdict.

Luntz, 63, believes one word encapsulates a phenomenon that could shape the rest of the century — and not just in America. What we are seeing, he says, is a “dealignment”, from traditional political, intellectual and economic allegiances that have developed over decades. “It’s a rejection of the governing institutions and the people who lead them.”

What comes through in answer after answer, in focus groups that can be watched in full on the Straight Arrow News website, is the animus felt by Trump voters towards the institutions that underpin American society — from Congress to colleges, businesses to banks.

As Joe from Missouri put it: “How do all these [members of] Congress and senators become millionaires when they’re supposed to be working for the people? ‘I’m a public servant.’ Bullshit. You’re an inside trader. You’re getting kickbacks.”

Luntz says this level of hostility towards institutions, and the perceived elites that run them, has reached breaking point. “Our institutions are failing,” he says. “What exactly is Congress doing? Are the courts overreaching? Are our schools succeeding? Is healthcare delivering the choice and affordability people need? The answer to all of these is no.

“The very moment that Trump has re-ascended to power is the very moment that our institutions are at their weakest and the public is at its angriest. That is leading to a rejection of the status quo and embrace of anything that says: ‘Change’.”

At one of Luntz’s most recent focus groups Mike, a Trump voter from Pennsylvania, summed up what he likes best about the president: “The exceptionalism and his tenacity and just kicking ass and taking no prisoners. That’s what we elected him to do — and he’s just getting started.”

The institutions rejected by Trump voters are also those that traditionally held the American president to account. “Accountability is essential in a functioning democracy but the media has lost the ability to hold the administration accountable by the way it’s covered it,” Luntz says. “Congress has not been challenging the administration in any meaningful way, and I’m waiting to see what happens with our legal system.”

Asked what Trump should be doing next, Christy from Maryland said: “Trump was injured. We care about him. We care that he was getting attacked at all these times. We want people to go to jail for this. We’re angry for him … We want people arrested.” There was murmur of agreement from others in the 15-person group.

Luntz says he found the strength of this feeling surprising. “In my Trump focus groups, they want to hold judges accountable. They want to hold Congress accountable — not just to defeat them but to punish them. It’s a value I’ve never seen in American politics until now, that desire to punish your opponent.”

He sees this as further evidence of the strong forces behind the dealignment.

[GftNC]

Part 2

One of the most powerful is the devotion to Trump that means his supporters will believe him, rather than the institutions and their leaders, which used to act as a corrective.

“I have talked to Trump voters who in one moment will say they love him because he sticks to his guns. He doesn’t yield, he doesn’t break,” Luntz adds. “Fifteen minutes later, the same person will tell me that they love his flexibility … They will forgive him for everything.”

He says the tariff policy proved a clear example of this willingness to hold contradictory positions out of support for Trump.

The top reason given by his voters for why they support him is his stewardship of the economy. Yet their pension accounts are being depleted as the markets are shaken by the tariffs, which also threaten to make consumer goods more expensive and out of reach.

The Trump phenomenon could be dismissed as a cult of personality, but Luntz believes otherwise. “You say to me, when Trump leaves, does this go away? I’ll say to you, absolutely not, because of JD Vance,” he says.

Vance’s reputation among the Maga faithful has grown since his assured performance in the vice-presidential debate with Tim Walz, Luntz says. “He presented an ideology behind the Trump cult of personality. Vance found a way to take all the individual aspects of Trump’s policies and put them in a way that will outlast Trump. It was masterful. This is also part of the de-alignment — now there is an ideology and it’s not just Trump’s persona.”

It is not all plain sailing for Trump with those who voted for him last November, however. Luntz is finding deep concerns among the 20 per cent of independent voters who handed him his swing state majorities.

“That 20 per cent wants a reduction in government spending and they want a reduction in bureaucrats. But they’re not looking for indiscriminate firing of people,” Luntz says. “They want it done with a scalpel, not a sledgehammer or a chainsaw.”

They want to get illegal immigrants out of the country but they want it done humanely, he says. “The execution of his agenda is turning swing voters against him.”

Luntz does not believe America is unique in experiencing the fracturing of society and governance under Trump. “We’re seeing a dealignment all throughout the globe,” he says. “This is because of social media, because of economic dislocation, because of greater migration and because of insufficient education.

“All of those elements are playing a role in pulling us apart from the ideologies and the parties and even the people that we have supported over time. I don’t think the elites are prepared for it.”

[wj]

My TV plays an advertisement for a local mattress store. Regional, not just town, but still just local.

They are having a "tariff free" clearance sale. Gives some insight as to what local business thinks is coming. And that they think their audience will understand what is happening (and why).

[Nigel]

The US still mines rare earths - Mountain pass in CA.
It just doesn't refine them in any quantity.

There are plenty more prospects.
The idea that it "needs" Greenland is risible.

It would take far longer to duplicate China's refining technology, in terms of efficiency, and production quantity, than it would to open new mines, I think.

[CharlesWT]

China has an advantage that the US doesn't. It doesn't have an EPA.

[russell]

Joe from Missouri has a point.

Mike from Pennsylvania and Christy from Maryland seem... overly attached to exacting vengeance. I don't trust people like that, you never really know what they are capable of.

And on the whole, as someone who prefers to breathe air I can see through, I find it hard to see the EPA as a disadvantage, net/net.

[russell]

Also - what the "scalpel rather than a chainsaw" folks are looking for is Al Gore's Reinventing Government initiative.

Not claiming that initiative was good or bad, successful or unsuccessful. Just noting that making government more efficient is not a new idea, and in fact has been done before, pretty effectively, without breaking everything in the process of doing so.

For various personal reasons, I keep trying to not think of MAGA folks as foolish, vengeful, willfully ignorant boneheads. I'll be honest and say i'm finding it really hard, and therefore finding it really hard to summon any interest in or patience with their point of view.

[CharlesWT]

I can see through, I find it hard to see the EPA as a disadvantage, net/net.

I think the EPA has often usurped Congress's role in rule-making, created regulations with disregard for costs/benefits, over-regulated, and has gotten lost in the weeds of diminishing returns.

But in this case, I mean that China engages in mining and industrial processes with little or no regard for the impact on the environment and people. That gives it a competitive advantage.

Western countries have reduced some of their pollution levels and environmental impacts by exporting them to China, India, and other countries.

[russell]

I understood what you meant, Charles. And I also understand the inefficiencies and bureaucratic inertia and tendency toward power grabbing that come with any regulatory institution.

I understand all of that.

And i'll gladly, or at least mostly gladly, put up with it in exchange for not being afraid of the air.

[JanieM]

russell: Thank you.

[wj]

as someone who prefers to breathe air I can see through

As someone who has experienced air across an entire region where visibility was a few dozen yards, I totally share your preference.

I wonder if what we are seeing (sorry!) here with the EPA isn't a close parallel with what we are seeing with respect to vaccines: people who are too young to remember what it was like before. Those of them in the general public notice some inconvenience, but are blissfully ignorant of the benefits.** Which makes them easy prey for those wishing to exploit that ignorance for financial or ideological reasons.

** To be fair, I can understand how someone in the US could find it hard to believe how bad the air (and water) got.

[GftNC]

I suppose this, in today's Guardian, is a kind of counter-argument to the Luntz findings I posted. I don't know, it seems a little optimistic to me. But then, I am not always famed for my optimism (ref my frequently-quoted favourite Gorey limerick), particularly these days:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/28/donald-trump-beware-global-liberal-fightback-canada

[Tony P.]

CharlesWT: I think the EPA has often usurped Congress's role in rule-making, created regulations with disregard for costs/benefits, over-regulated, and has gotten lost in the weeds of diminishing returns.

Congress contains way more ideologues than scientists. Is it the Libertarian(TM) position that delegating empirical questions (e.g. the causes, effects, and remedies of, say, air pollution) to technical experts is a bad thing? Also, do Libertarians(TM) expect Congresscritters to take time out of their busy fundraising schedules to write (and debate, and vote on) detailed "regulations"?

To paraphrase CharlesWT, "I think" Libertarians(TM) have idiosyncratic definitions of "costs", "benefits", and "over-"anything.

--TP

[CharlesWT]

The Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC (1984) case came about when several environmental groups sued the EPA because they thought the technical experts at the EPA were being more lenient with polluters than the Clean Air Act allowed. The Court deferred to the experts.

The Court has used several cases after Chevron to reduce its scope. There's a chance that Chevron will be completely reversed this year.

[wj]

do Libertarians(TM) expect Congresscritters to take time out of their busy fundraising schedules to write (and debate, and vote on) detailed "regulations"?

If Congress were to take up writing legislation regarding the things that the EPA, and other regulatory agencies, currently address, what would that mean really?

As you note, the Congress is short (rather shorter than I recall from my youth) of expertise even acquaintance with the fields that regulations cover. So actually crafting the legislation would be left either to anonymous staffers (with not much more knowledge) or, more likely, to lobbyists for the industries being regulated. Assuming much in the way of regulation got written at all.

[JanieM]

Let's not even start on car salespeople and lawyers crafting legislation controlling and limiting what doctors can do for pregnant women....

Kay at BJ (formerly a front-pager, feisty arguer, now gone from there to a different blog) pointed out quite eloquently a while back that the three (?) women who sued in Texas because of the bad medical care they got as a result of the state's viciously restrictive abortion law did not want abortions, they wanted babies. And yet.....

[liberal japonicus]

China has an advantage that the US doesn't. It doesn't have an EPA.

China also has the advantage of not having libertarians making disingenuous arguments (Unless you count Daoists as libertarians, which I don't)

As someone who has experienced air across an entire region where visibility was a few dozen yards, I totally share your preference.

Where were you? Folks in Asia usually have a bad air story. When I was in Korea on my sabbatical, the hwangsa (yellow dust) was really bad and even here in Japan, it can cause problems, though it seems to be getting better.

[wj]

I was east of LA (March AFB, if that helps) in the summer of 1972. We had lovely weather for a week. Then I saw what looked to be a range of hills to the west of us which I hadn't noticed before. Sort of orangeish, which in retrospect should have been a clue.

A day later, it arrived. Because, of course, it wasn't a range of hills at all. Just some seriously polluted air drifting out way.

[Ugh]

hilzoy is retiring:

https://bsky.app/profile/hilzoy.bsky.social/post/3lnw7xylzic2o

Come back hilzoy!!!

[hairshirthedonist]

I expect there are some disappointed students who were looking forward to taking her class, but good for her! Some long-lost ObWi regulars in the comments on her post.

[GftNC]

Come back hilzoy!!!

I wish. But the truth is, I think we'd have to majorly up our game to be worthy of her.

[wj]

Well, she's a teacher. Perhaps she could teach us.

[JanieM]

It would be wonderful to have her back, to understate the case by a great deal.

As to being worthy of her, I expect she would attract a lot of new/old readers and commenters, i.e. our doughty band of survivors wouldn't have to go it alone.

[JanieM]

As to not being afraid of the air, good luck with that. (To all of us.)

[Pro Bono]

There are two places I've been to where the air pollution was striking - LA and Kowloon. Whereas London, once notorious for its "pea-soupers" has been tolerable in my lifetime. Which may mean that regulations can work if lobbyists don't get at them. Or perhaps the climate is too much of a challenge in some places.

[CharlesWT]

World's Air Pollution: Real-time Air Quality Index

[Michael Cain]

After I had lived in Fort Collins for a few weeks and then had to drive down to Denver, what I noticed was much of the Denver metro area often had an underlying odor of VOCs (volatile organic compounds). Faint, but noticeable. More so if you were somewhere near the Platte River or one of its tributaries, the low points in the local topography.

The Brown Cloud is beginning to make a comeback. The population has continued to grow at a rate such that fossil-fuel electric generation and internal-combustion cars can't keep getting cleaner fast enough to offset. The executive branch of the state government has been encouraging the federal EPA to declare the northern Front Range to be in serious non-compliance on ozone. That's what they're using to push wind/solar/battery for power generation, provide subsidies for electric vehicles, and enforce tighter regulations on the oil/gas drilling industry.

[Michael Cain]

Hilzoy has earned the right to move on rather than looking back. Philosophy is, I suspect, like mathematics: philosophers don't retire, they just go back to being amateurs :^) I look forward to seeing what it is.

[wj]

There are two places I've been to where the air pollution was striking - LA and Kowloon.
...
Or perhaps the climate is too much of a challenge in some places.

It should, perhaps, be noted that the Native American residents referred to LA as the Valley of Smoke. Long before the Spanish, let alone the Anglos, first appeared on the scene.

[Michael Cain]

There are two places I've been to where the air pollution was striking - LA and Kowloon.

California's worst air now on entire-year all-pollutants basis is the southeast end of the Central Valley. Goop from a variety of sources, the most common prevailing winds pushes the goop southeast down the valley, and then the mountains hold it in.

[Michael Cain]

...the Native American residents referred to LA as the Valley of Smoke.

The federal EPA's ozone standard is based on exceeding a certain numeric value for ozone and precursors a certain number of days per year. Most metro areas in the American West will fail even if all the people and associated tech went away: the smoke plumes from naturally-occurring wildfires, even when the plume is not visible, violate the new standard.

[wj]

California's worst air now on entire-year all-pollutants basis is the southeast end of the Central Valley

That would be Kevin McCarthy's old district, right? Which would arguably make the population on record as not caring.

[Michael Cain]

That would be Kevin McCarthy's old district, right? Which would arguably make the population on record as not caring.

Carefully drawn while he was still sitting to avoid almost all of Bakersfield, Fresno, and a couple of other cities. Despite the air quality, Bakersfield has grown past 400,000 people, and Fresno past 500,000.