As Mainland China looks more and more likely to reduce future rare earth element export quotas, will an American rare earth industry revival fill in the global shortfall?
By: Ringo Bones
If you're one of the few concerned citizens of this planet closely watching the concerns surrounding the global rare earth metals demand, then it is inevitable that one of these days, a news that the United States is seriously playing catch-up with the established 21st Century global rare earth industry - namely Mainland China - which controls 97% of the global rare earth industry. But is America's rare earth industry revival nothing more than a toe-in-the-water exercise in economic terms?
In a July 12, 2011 interview with the BBC, Molycorp spokesman Jim Sims says that Molycorp has already reactivated a "retired" open-pit rare earth mine high in the Mojave Desert of California that has been closed 10 years ago. Even if the long-term economic and political will driving this endeavor remains uncertain, are there other obvious advantages of reviving America's home-grown rare earth industry?
Whatever the incumbent and/or incoming administration decides in the near future, America's concern for securing her rare earth metal demands is not just combined to high-tech and carbon-neutral technologies anymore like laptops, loudspeaker magnets, hard-disk drives, color TVs, electric cars and wind turbines anymore. Rare earths also serve a very important component in the American defense industry. From unmanned drones, actuators in JDAMs and guided missiles just to name a few. The question now is not only whether or not the occupational health and environmental concerns surrounding the revival of America's rare earth industry is worth it in the long-run, but also if America can still afford to chose not to revive and then expand its long dormant rare earth metals industry?
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
The IUPAC: Too Rare Earth Friendly?
It might be too friendly in an academic sense, but given that 2011 is the UN International Year of Chemistry does the relation between the IUPAC and the Rare Earth elements deserve a more thorough and renewed discussion?
By: Ringo Bones
Unlike the International Astronomical Union - or IAU – which controversially dethroned Pluto as a bona fide planet of our Solar System back in 2006, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry or IUPAC has since its establishment managed to steer clear from such academically controversial maneuverings, namely re-evaluating the status of some supposedly true-blue rare earth elements. And given that 2011 has just been designated by UNESCO as the International Year of Chemistry, should the IUPAC at least try to look into the issue this year? But first, here’s an overview of the IUPAC and the 2011 International Year of Chemistry.
The declaration of the United Nation’s 2011 International Year of Chemistry was decided as far back as December 2008 I New York and Paris during the 63rd General Assembly of the United Nations when it adopted a resolution proclaiming 2011 as the International Year of Chemistry, placing UNESCO and the IUPAC at the helm of the event. Ethiopia submitted the UN Resolution calling the Year which would celebrate the achievements of the science of chemistry and its contributions to the well-being of humanity. The year will also draw attention to the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005 – 2014. National and international activities carried out during 2011 will emphasize the importance of sustaining natural resources.
The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry or IUPAC was formed back in 1919 by chemists from industry and academia. For over 90 years, the “Union” has succeeded in fostering worldwide communications in the chemical sciences and in uniting academic, industrial and public sector chemistry in a common language. Given that 2011 is the UN International Year of Chemistry could this inevitably “tempt” the IUPAC to do a somewhat questionable academic stunt – like what the IAU did with Pluto back in 2006 - by booting out lanthanum as a true-blue rare earth element?
Even though the Rare Earth family or kingdom of elements is also known as the Lanthanide Series named after lanthanum, lanthanum possessed enough anomalies that lanthanum’s inclusion in the rare earth series of elements could have been easily called into question. Ever since after thorough scientific analysis since its discovery, element number 57 lanthanum chemical symbol La, can be considered a maverick among the rare earth elements. In the strictest sense, it is not actually a member of the rare earth inner transition series since it does not have a 4f-electron. Lanthanum’s differentiating electron – from barium – is found in the 5d-orbital. Although lanthanum’s chemical properties does very so resemble those of the rare earth family of elements that the IUPAC had never considered booting it out.
And lanthanum is not the only atomically and chemically controversial member of the rare earth series of elements. The IUPAC has since placed scandium in the Group III B of the First Transition Metals portion of the Periodic Table even though scandium have chemical properties and an atomic structure that intriguely mimics that of the lanthanide series or rare earth elements. So too does yttrium which possesses chemical properties mimicking that of the rare earth elements even though yttrium possesses no 4f-electrons in common with the rare earth elements. Could the 2011 International Year of Chemistry trigger a “revolution” in the Rare Earth Kingdom?
By: Ringo Bones
Unlike the International Astronomical Union - or IAU – which controversially dethroned Pluto as a bona fide planet of our Solar System back in 2006, the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry or IUPAC has since its establishment managed to steer clear from such academically controversial maneuverings, namely re-evaluating the status of some supposedly true-blue rare earth elements. And given that 2011 has just been designated by UNESCO as the International Year of Chemistry, should the IUPAC at least try to look into the issue this year? But first, here’s an overview of the IUPAC and the 2011 International Year of Chemistry.
The declaration of the United Nation’s 2011 International Year of Chemistry was decided as far back as December 2008 I New York and Paris during the 63rd General Assembly of the United Nations when it adopted a resolution proclaiming 2011 as the International Year of Chemistry, placing UNESCO and the IUPAC at the helm of the event. Ethiopia submitted the UN Resolution calling the Year which would celebrate the achievements of the science of chemistry and its contributions to the well-being of humanity. The year will also draw attention to the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005 – 2014. National and international activities carried out during 2011 will emphasize the importance of sustaining natural resources.
The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry or IUPAC was formed back in 1919 by chemists from industry and academia. For over 90 years, the “Union” has succeeded in fostering worldwide communications in the chemical sciences and in uniting academic, industrial and public sector chemistry in a common language. Given that 2011 is the UN International Year of Chemistry could this inevitably “tempt” the IUPAC to do a somewhat questionable academic stunt – like what the IAU did with Pluto back in 2006 - by booting out lanthanum as a true-blue rare earth element?
Even though the Rare Earth family or kingdom of elements is also known as the Lanthanide Series named after lanthanum, lanthanum possessed enough anomalies that lanthanum’s inclusion in the rare earth series of elements could have been easily called into question. Ever since after thorough scientific analysis since its discovery, element number 57 lanthanum chemical symbol La, can be considered a maverick among the rare earth elements. In the strictest sense, it is not actually a member of the rare earth inner transition series since it does not have a 4f-electron. Lanthanum’s differentiating electron – from barium – is found in the 5d-orbital. Although lanthanum’s chemical properties does very so resemble those of the rare earth family of elements that the IUPAC had never considered booting it out.
And lanthanum is not the only atomically and chemically controversial member of the rare earth series of elements. The IUPAC has since placed scandium in the Group III B of the First Transition Metals portion of the Periodic Table even though scandium have chemical properties and an atomic structure that intriguely mimics that of the lanthanide series or rare earth elements. So too does yttrium which possesses chemical properties mimicking that of the rare earth elements even though yttrium possesses no 4f-electrons in common with the rare earth elements. Could the 2011 International Year of Chemistry trigger a “revolution” in the Rare Earth Kingdom?
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Are Rare Earth Elements Precious Metals?
With only a handful of countries in the whole world mining and refining them and Mainland China planning to reduce their export quotas for 2011, will rare earth metals soon become precious metals?
By: Ringo Bones
Though Paris Hilton has yet to brag about her brand-new 22-karat dysprosium bracelet (or will it be a 22-karat holmium bracelet?) rare earth metal prices will surely rise and become much rarer because the People’s Republic of China had already decided back in January 6, 2011 to cut their rare earth metal export quotas by 35% for the whole of 2011. Will this turn of events inadvertently turn rare earth elements into precious metals?
The Beijing government’s decision to reduce their rare earth metal export quotas instantly posed a real concern for Japan’s high-tech manufacturing firms since electric motors of hybrid cars and other high-tech consumer items like video monitors are very dependent on rare earth metals in their construction and manufacture. The Mainland Chinese rare earth export quota cut had even stepped-up Japan’s plans to explore the mining potential of the seabed of their territorial waters for rare earth elements.
As a very important reiteration, the elements commonly referred to as “rare earths” are neither rare nor earths. These soft and malleable metals only became commercially rare due to the People’s Republic of China flexing their newfound geopolitical clout by controlling their own export quotas. Cerium, the most abundant, is slightly more plentiful than tin and lead. While thulium – the scarcest of the rare earth elements – is only slightly rarer than iodine. The “earth” misnomer arose from the fact that the first source of the elements during their discovery is from the oxides of the elements themselves.
As the current textbook definition of precious metals – when pertaining to the “top three” like gold, silver and platinum – primarily revolves around their beauty, their rarity and high demand that makes them pricey are just incidentally brought upon by economics. While platinum’s usefulness as a very important chemical catalyst might make it as one of the “traditional” precious metals that has a kinship with the rare earth metals in terms of industrial use, rare earth metals – appearance-wise – have never been and probably never will be “attractive enough” to have lend themselves for jewelry use. Probably due to their rather "mediocre" gray-silver sheen.
And it does deserve worthy of a mention that three of the rare earth elements – europium, lanthanum and yttrium – will surely never be used as a fashionably drab jewelry because chemically pure europium, lanthanum and yttrium will corrode within a few hours upon exposure to our oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere. Chemically pure specimens of europium, lanthanum and yttrium are often available as a laboratory curiosity as a specimen displayed and sealed in a glass container filled with argon gas. So will rare earth metals ever become precious metals? In price maybe, but don’t count on them winding up as part of Paris Hilton’s bling anytime soon.
By: Ringo Bones
Though Paris Hilton has yet to brag about her brand-new 22-karat dysprosium bracelet (or will it be a 22-karat holmium bracelet?) rare earth metal prices will surely rise and become much rarer because the People’s Republic of China had already decided back in January 6, 2011 to cut their rare earth metal export quotas by 35% for the whole of 2011. Will this turn of events inadvertently turn rare earth elements into precious metals?
The Beijing government’s decision to reduce their rare earth metal export quotas instantly posed a real concern for Japan’s high-tech manufacturing firms since electric motors of hybrid cars and other high-tech consumer items like video monitors are very dependent on rare earth metals in their construction and manufacture. The Mainland Chinese rare earth export quota cut had even stepped-up Japan’s plans to explore the mining potential of the seabed of their territorial waters for rare earth elements.
As a very important reiteration, the elements commonly referred to as “rare earths” are neither rare nor earths. These soft and malleable metals only became commercially rare due to the People’s Republic of China flexing their newfound geopolitical clout by controlling their own export quotas. Cerium, the most abundant, is slightly more plentiful than tin and lead. While thulium – the scarcest of the rare earth elements – is only slightly rarer than iodine. The “earth” misnomer arose from the fact that the first source of the elements during their discovery is from the oxides of the elements themselves.
As the current textbook definition of precious metals – when pertaining to the “top three” like gold, silver and platinum – primarily revolves around their beauty, their rarity and high demand that makes them pricey are just incidentally brought upon by economics. While platinum’s usefulness as a very important chemical catalyst might make it as one of the “traditional” precious metals that has a kinship with the rare earth metals in terms of industrial use, rare earth metals – appearance-wise – have never been and probably never will be “attractive enough” to have lend themselves for jewelry use. Probably due to their rather "mediocre" gray-silver sheen.
And it does deserve worthy of a mention that three of the rare earth elements – europium, lanthanum and yttrium – will surely never be used as a fashionably drab jewelry because chemically pure europium, lanthanum and yttrium will corrode within a few hours upon exposure to our oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere. Chemically pure specimens of europium, lanthanum and yttrium are often available as a laboratory curiosity as a specimen displayed and sealed in a glass container filled with argon gas. So will rare earth metals ever become precious metals? In price maybe, but don’t count on them winding up as part of Paris Hilton’s bling anytime soon.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Dysprosium: The Hard to Get At Rare Earth Element?
Even though this rare earth element and its myriad of uses has yet to become a household name, does dysprosium truly deserve its reputation as the hard to get at rare earth element?
By: Ringo Bones
Given that this rare earth element is never found free in nature, the derivation of its name – dysprositos, Greek for hard to get at – is probably an apt name of its chemical properties that eludes dysprosium’s purification to six-nines level (99.9999% purity) until the advent of modern ion-exchange and solvent-extraction procedures of the mid to late 1950s. Dysprosium, atomic number 66, chemical symbol Dy, is a member of the lanthanide – or rare earth series of elements – which also includes such rare earth metals as cerium, lanthanum and yttrium. Dysprosium has a melting point of about 1,500 degree Celsius and a boiling point of 2,300 degree Celsius.
The discovery of dysprosium was credited to the French chemist Paul Émil Lecoq de Boisbaudran back in 1886. Although Georges Urbain later obtained a reasonably pure sample of the metal in 1906, the free element has never been chemically isolated until the advent of modern ion-exchange and solvent-extraction techniques of the mid to late 1950s.
Dysprosium occurs naturally in minerals usually found in granite or pegmatite veins, such as euxenite, gadolinite, samarskite and xenotime. Dysprosium is also found among the products of nuclear-fission reactions. Dysprosium is separated from other rare earth metals which it occurs via ion-exchange and solvent-extraction methods.
Dysprosium is used primarily in nuclear reactor control rods and its other chief practical use is in nuclear reactors, where it serves as a nuclear “poison” – that is, it is employed as a neutron-eating material to keep the neutron-spawning atomic chain reaction from getting out of hand and also in magnetic alloys.
Dysprosium has a valence of +3 and forms yellow-green colored compounds. Dysprosium is ferromagnetic below – 123 degrees Celsius. Just like pure gallium when chilled with liquid nitrogen, dysprosium will stick to an ordinary bar magnet. And at liquid helium temperatures, dysprosium becomes a superconductor.
Dysprosium’s high magnetic susceptibility makes it useful for data storage devices and as a component of Terfenol-D – a powerful rare earth magnet first used in US Navy sonar systems. Soluble dysprosium salts are mildly toxic while the insoluble salts are considered non-toxic.
By: Ringo Bones
Given that this rare earth element is never found free in nature, the derivation of its name – dysprositos, Greek for hard to get at – is probably an apt name of its chemical properties that eludes dysprosium’s purification to six-nines level (99.9999% purity) until the advent of modern ion-exchange and solvent-extraction procedures of the mid to late 1950s. Dysprosium, atomic number 66, chemical symbol Dy, is a member of the lanthanide – or rare earth series of elements – which also includes such rare earth metals as cerium, lanthanum and yttrium. Dysprosium has a melting point of about 1,500 degree Celsius and a boiling point of 2,300 degree Celsius.
The discovery of dysprosium was credited to the French chemist Paul Émil Lecoq de Boisbaudran back in 1886. Although Georges Urbain later obtained a reasonably pure sample of the metal in 1906, the free element has never been chemically isolated until the advent of modern ion-exchange and solvent-extraction techniques of the mid to late 1950s.
Dysprosium occurs naturally in minerals usually found in granite or pegmatite veins, such as euxenite, gadolinite, samarskite and xenotime. Dysprosium is also found among the products of nuclear-fission reactions. Dysprosium is separated from other rare earth metals which it occurs via ion-exchange and solvent-extraction methods.
Dysprosium is used primarily in nuclear reactor control rods and its other chief practical use is in nuclear reactors, where it serves as a nuclear “poison” – that is, it is employed as a neutron-eating material to keep the neutron-spawning atomic chain reaction from getting out of hand and also in magnetic alloys.
Dysprosium has a valence of +3 and forms yellow-green colored compounds. Dysprosium is ferromagnetic below – 123 degrees Celsius. Just like pure gallium when chilled with liquid nitrogen, dysprosium will stick to an ordinary bar magnet. And at liquid helium temperatures, dysprosium becomes a superconductor.
Dysprosium’s high magnetic susceptibility makes it useful for data storage devices and as a component of Terfenol-D – a powerful rare earth magnet first used in US Navy sonar systems. Soluble dysprosium salts are mildly toxic while the insoluble salts are considered non-toxic.
Carl Auer von Welsbach: The Rare Earth Kingdom’s Royal Surveyor?
As a well-renowned chemist and a discoverer of a number of rare earth elements, is Carl Auer von Welsbch the Rare Earth Kingdom’s Royal Surveyor?
By: Ringo Bones
Born in Vienna back in September 1, 1858, little did the whole world knew that Carl Auer von Welsbach will in a few years time be almost single-handedly exploring and surveying the then relatively unknown “Rare Earth Kingdom” in Mendeleyev’s Periodic Table for the benefit of not just the world of chemistry, but for all mankind. The exploratory journey started when Welsbach first studied chemistry under Robert W. Bunsen at the University of Heidelberg, where Welsbach made investigations in the chemistry of rare-earth metals. Later, Welsbach attended the University of Vienna.
In his exploration of the Rare Earth Kingdom, Welsbach became the first chemist to isolate the elements neodymium, samarium and praseodymium back in 1885. he is also best known for his invention in 1885 of the Welsbach Mantle – a means for increasing the illumination given off by a gas jet – which soon after found world-wide use. The Welsbach Mantle consisted of a wad of cotton which had been dipped in a salt solution of zirconium or some other suitable element. The mantle was supported over a gas jet, which would burn away the cotton the first time it was lit., leaving a brittle network of filament which becomes incandescent at a much lower temperature – thus making gas jet illumination much more fuel efficient.
During the advent of electric lighting, Welsbach invented the osmium filament for electric lights. And in 1907, Welsbach managed to isolate another rare earth element called lutetium to a reasonable degree of chemical purity back in 1907 before the advent of the post-World War II zeolite ion-exchange techniques. For a number of years, Welsbach was a member of technical societies in Vienna, Stockholm and Berlin. He died in Carinthia on August 4, 1929. Before passing away, Carl Auer von Welsbach managed to map much of the rare earth portion of the periodic table for the ease and convenience of a generation of chemists following his footsteps.
By: Ringo Bones
Born in Vienna back in September 1, 1858, little did the whole world knew that Carl Auer von Welsbach will in a few years time be almost single-handedly exploring and surveying the then relatively unknown “Rare Earth Kingdom” in Mendeleyev’s Periodic Table for the benefit of not just the world of chemistry, but for all mankind. The exploratory journey started when Welsbach first studied chemistry under Robert W. Bunsen at the University of Heidelberg, where Welsbach made investigations in the chemistry of rare-earth metals. Later, Welsbach attended the University of Vienna.
In his exploration of the Rare Earth Kingdom, Welsbach became the first chemist to isolate the elements neodymium, samarium and praseodymium back in 1885. he is also best known for his invention in 1885 of the Welsbach Mantle – a means for increasing the illumination given off by a gas jet – which soon after found world-wide use. The Welsbach Mantle consisted of a wad of cotton which had been dipped in a salt solution of zirconium or some other suitable element. The mantle was supported over a gas jet, which would burn away the cotton the first time it was lit., leaving a brittle network of filament which becomes incandescent at a much lower temperature – thus making gas jet illumination much more fuel efficient.
During the advent of electric lighting, Welsbach invented the osmium filament for electric lights. And in 1907, Welsbach managed to isolate another rare earth element called lutetium to a reasonable degree of chemical purity back in 1907 before the advent of the post-World War II zeolite ion-exchange techniques. For a number of years, Welsbach was a member of technical societies in Vienna, Stockholm and Berlin. He died in Carinthia on August 4, 1929. Before passing away, Carl Auer von Welsbach managed to map much of the rare earth portion of the periodic table for the ease and convenience of a generation of chemists following his footsteps.
Thursday, December 23, 2010
Rare Earth Metals: Ideal Optically Pumped Lasing Material?
Given that rare earth metals based optically pumped lasers are widely used since the 1960s and until now proof that rare earth metals are an ideal optically pumped lasing material?
By: Ringo Bones
In the 1960s till now, optically pumped lasers produce higher outputs – in terms of both energy and peak power – than those in the discharge excited gas lasers or electron injection lasers or semiconductor lasers. Even as far back as 1964, optically pumped lasers were already capable of producing pulse energies of 2,000-joules and peak powers of 5-gigawatts or 5-billion watts. Optically pumped lasers are still the widely used type both in practical development and in laboratory research. In optically pumped lasers, the atoms in the laser material are indirectly excited by light from an intense light source – such as a xenon flash lamp – that is often coiled, snake-like, around the material. Like the other types of lasers, optically pumped lasers may either operate in a pulsed or continuous wave. A pulsed laser produces a burst of radiation that lasts about a thousandth – or in some cases, a few billionths – of a second. In a continuous-wave laser, the intensity achieved is much less, but the laser beam comes out in a continuous stream.
Although there are perhaps 20 or so optically pumped solid-state laser materials, like those calcium chloride crystals doped with samarium that can produce laser beams intense enough to burn metal or bounce off the Moon, 4 are the most dominant: ruby, neodymium doped glass, neodymium-doped calcium tungstate, and dysprosium-doped calcium fluoride. The ruby and glass lasers normally operate at room temperatures, and in the pulse mode. The neodymium-doped calcium tungstate and dysprosium-doped calcium fluoride can readily be operated to emit continuous waves; however, the dysprosium-doped calcium fluoride must be cooled to cryogenic temperatures about that of liquid air.
There is even a class of organic liquids, such as nitrobenzene, that exhibits simulated Raman emission when optically pumped by another laser. A plastic laser, developed in 1963, uses europium chelates dissolved in a clear plastic fiber as the lasing material to produce crimson pulses when excited by ultraviolet light. Lasers of this sort are also used as a light source in Raman spectroscopy – a spectroscopic technique of great value in organic chemistry based on an effect discovered by the Indian physicist Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman – and has greatly facilitated studies in that field.
Ever since as far back as the 1960s, medical-grade optically pumped lasers were already used in eye surgery where it is used to treat retinal detachment especially if the retina – the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye tears loose from the eyeball – blindness may result. When a laser beam is focused through the lens of the eye, the intense burning ray may cause scar tissues to form at the point of separation, reattaching the retina by fusing it to the underlying tissue. While today’s medical-grade optically pumped lasers used in ophthalmological applications are in the more popular cost-effective Lasik eye surgery. Optically pumped lasers are proof yet again that almost all of our high-tech tools are very dependent on rare earth metals in their construction and operation.
By: Ringo Bones
In the 1960s till now, optically pumped lasers produce higher outputs – in terms of both energy and peak power – than those in the discharge excited gas lasers or electron injection lasers or semiconductor lasers. Even as far back as 1964, optically pumped lasers were already capable of producing pulse energies of 2,000-joules and peak powers of 5-gigawatts or 5-billion watts. Optically pumped lasers are still the widely used type both in practical development and in laboratory research. In optically pumped lasers, the atoms in the laser material are indirectly excited by light from an intense light source – such as a xenon flash lamp – that is often coiled, snake-like, around the material. Like the other types of lasers, optically pumped lasers may either operate in a pulsed or continuous wave. A pulsed laser produces a burst of radiation that lasts about a thousandth – or in some cases, a few billionths – of a second. In a continuous-wave laser, the intensity achieved is much less, but the laser beam comes out in a continuous stream.
Although there are perhaps 20 or so optically pumped solid-state laser materials, like those calcium chloride crystals doped with samarium that can produce laser beams intense enough to burn metal or bounce off the Moon, 4 are the most dominant: ruby, neodymium doped glass, neodymium-doped calcium tungstate, and dysprosium-doped calcium fluoride. The ruby and glass lasers normally operate at room temperatures, and in the pulse mode. The neodymium-doped calcium tungstate and dysprosium-doped calcium fluoride can readily be operated to emit continuous waves; however, the dysprosium-doped calcium fluoride must be cooled to cryogenic temperatures about that of liquid air.
There is even a class of organic liquids, such as nitrobenzene, that exhibits simulated Raman emission when optically pumped by another laser. A plastic laser, developed in 1963, uses europium chelates dissolved in a clear plastic fiber as the lasing material to produce crimson pulses when excited by ultraviolet light. Lasers of this sort are also used as a light source in Raman spectroscopy – a spectroscopic technique of great value in organic chemistry based on an effect discovered by the Indian physicist Sir Chandrasekhara Venkata Raman – and has greatly facilitated studies in that field.
Ever since as far back as the 1960s, medical-grade optically pumped lasers were already used in eye surgery where it is used to treat retinal detachment especially if the retina – the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye tears loose from the eyeball – blindness may result. When a laser beam is focused through the lens of the eye, the intense burning ray may cause scar tissues to form at the point of separation, reattaching the retina by fusing it to the underlying tissue. While today’s medical-grade optically pumped lasers used in ophthalmological applications are in the more popular cost-effective Lasik eye surgery. Optically pumped lasers are proof yet again that almost all of our high-tech tools are very dependent on rare earth metals in their construction and operation.
Are Rare Earth Metals Mines Economically Viable?
Given that they tend to elude accurate valuation by conventional and established mine valuation methods, are rare earth metals mines truly economically viable?
By: Ringo Bones
Even though Mainland China had more or less resumed its import quotas to Japan and the rest of the globe back in November 24, 2010, Beijing’s current unrivalled monopoly of the commercial mining and production of rare earth metals can easily make anyone wonder why the United States or any other nation in the world can’t seem to be able to start their very own economically viable rare earth metals industry. Although as of December 10, 2010, Molycorp of the U.S. – the largest producer of rare earth metals outside of the People’s Republic of China - and the Japanese metals trading giant Sumitomo had inked a deal for a mutual rare earth metals supply security. But is the reason just down to economics? Or do we have to look back why in the previous 20 or so years how America and some other nations managed to make a profit in the commercial mining and production of rare earth metals.
It is no coincidence why America’s very own home-grown rare earth metals mining industry was abruptly shut down 20 years ago – right about the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the then Soviet Union. America’s rare earth metals industry was subsidized by the uranium industry – or more accurately the nuclear fission power generation and the nuclear weapons industry. It is now common knowledge that most uranium ores also contain commercially viable amounts of rare earth metals. And the zeolite ion-exchange resin techniques used to process rare earth metals also works for the chemically purification of plutonium-239 from the nuclear pile. Nuclear weapons used to safeguard the United States against the then Soviet Union so the nuclear weapons industry was the primarily subsidizing America’s rare earth metals industry before their closure around 1989 and 1990 since construction of new civilian nuclear fission power plants on American soil was frozen by the US congress after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident of 1979.
Compared to mainland China’s relatively low labor costs, America’s rare earth metal industry looks like a losing proposition when this factor is taken into account in a typical mine valuation calculation. Typically, the ability of a mining property to earn is a measure of its value. Many factors including the natural resources and the plant and the equipment must be taken into account. Consideration must also be given to operating efficiency, labor costs, taxes, and to the critical factors of supply and demand and the purchasing power of money – i.e. the currently prevailing economic conditions. In order to determine the commercial viability of a certain mining operation, the present worth and the prospective possibilities must be determined; the risks must be recognized and evaluated. Such determinations are made to the maximum extent possible on the basis of the factual information that can be assembled as amended and weighed in the judgment and experience of the examining mining engineer.
In the final analysis, every mine valuation is a considered estimate as opposed to an exact appraisal. It would be a rare accident of coincidence if the actual outcome of operations was in accord with the predicted result of prior examination. Despite the certainty that the results of examination will be inaccurate, the greatest possible care must be exercised in making an evaluation in order to measure the degree of risk. The determination of value of a certain mine starts when the examination has been completed to provide ore-reverse data, mining costs and profits, financial requirements, and future prospects, mathematical calculations may be made to establish the present dollar-and-cents value of the ore deposits.
These computations are made on a gross basis so that the result is a single figure. This one sum represents a compounding of the capital required to equip the mine, the realization from sale of product less cost of sales, and amortization of plant as well as interest on invested capital. The remainder is the profit or true value and must be reduced to present worth by giving effect to the time period in which the profit is revealed. A variety of formulas have been developed for use in the valuation of this kind. The present value of the annual dividend to be paid out over the “estimated” 20-year life of a specified mine can be determined by use of one or the other number of mine valuation formulas.
It is somewhat evident that the 20-year lifetime assumed for a typical rare earth metals mine could be changed but a number of factors bear on establishing mining rate. These include the additional proven ore reserves that can be established – which is a little difficult since the difference of the percentage concentration of an economically viable rare earth metals mine and the one that’s not is not that large. Then there are equipment costs which increase with the size of the plant, the mechanical efficiency of the plant, the market for the product – which could be depressed by overproduction – and the security of the investment. Shares of a mine with a long life typically are more preferred by investors.
Given that there are no new nuclear fission power plants being constructed in the US since the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear fission power plant accident and the most recent Will Lyman narrated science documentary about nuclear fission power plants that mentions dysprosium and holmium nuclear poisons was probably produced between 1992 and 1995, it seems that the civilian nuclear power generation industry and the US DoD’s nuclear weapons program are no longer subsidizing America’s rare earth metals mining industry to make them economically viable enough to continue operating in the austere fiscal environment of a post Cold War world.
And given that the current main use of rare earth metals is in the consumer electronics industry and low carbon energy generation from renewable sources, it seems that the high labor costs and lack of government sourced subsidies spelled the death knell of America’s rare earth metals mining industry in the post Cold War world. Even the profitability of the Mainland China’s rare earth metals mining industry is walking on a thin line indeed when valuated using established mine valuation methods. So let’s just wish good luck to Molycorp and Sumitomo for inking that rare earth metals deal, hope you’ll make a handsome profit this 2011.
By: Ringo Bones
Even though Mainland China had more or less resumed its import quotas to Japan and the rest of the globe back in November 24, 2010, Beijing’s current unrivalled monopoly of the commercial mining and production of rare earth metals can easily make anyone wonder why the United States or any other nation in the world can’t seem to be able to start their very own economically viable rare earth metals industry. Although as of December 10, 2010, Molycorp of the U.S. – the largest producer of rare earth metals outside of the People’s Republic of China - and the Japanese metals trading giant Sumitomo had inked a deal for a mutual rare earth metals supply security. But is the reason just down to economics? Or do we have to look back why in the previous 20 or so years how America and some other nations managed to make a profit in the commercial mining and production of rare earth metals.
It is no coincidence why America’s very own home-grown rare earth metals mining industry was abruptly shut down 20 years ago – right about the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the then Soviet Union. America’s rare earth metals industry was subsidized by the uranium industry – or more accurately the nuclear fission power generation and the nuclear weapons industry. It is now common knowledge that most uranium ores also contain commercially viable amounts of rare earth metals. And the zeolite ion-exchange resin techniques used to process rare earth metals also works for the chemically purification of plutonium-239 from the nuclear pile. Nuclear weapons used to safeguard the United States against the then Soviet Union so the nuclear weapons industry was the primarily subsidizing America’s rare earth metals industry before their closure around 1989 and 1990 since construction of new civilian nuclear fission power plants on American soil was frozen by the US congress after the Three Mile Island nuclear accident of 1979.
Compared to mainland China’s relatively low labor costs, America’s rare earth metal industry looks like a losing proposition when this factor is taken into account in a typical mine valuation calculation. Typically, the ability of a mining property to earn is a measure of its value. Many factors including the natural resources and the plant and the equipment must be taken into account. Consideration must also be given to operating efficiency, labor costs, taxes, and to the critical factors of supply and demand and the purchasing power of money – i.e. the currently prevailing economic conditions. In order to determine the commercial viability of a certain mining operation, the present worth and the prospective possibilities must be determined; the risks must be recognized and evaluated. Such determinations are made to the maximum extent possible on the basis of the factual information that can be assembled as amended and weighed in the judgment and experience of the examining mining engineer.
In the final analysis, every mine valuation is a considered estimate as opposed to an exact appraisal. It would be a rare accident of coincidence if the actual outcome of operations was in accord with the predicted result of prior examination. Despite the certainty that the results of examination will be inaccurate, the greatest possible care must be exercised in making an evaluation in order to measure the degree of risk. The determination of value of a certain mine starts when the examination has been completed to provide ore-reverse data, mining costs and profits, financial requirements, and future prospects, mathematical calculations may be made to establish the present dollar-and-cents value of the ore deposits.
These computations are made on a gross basis so that the result is a single figure. This one sum represents a compounding of the capital required to equip the mine, the realization from sale of product less cost of sales, and amortization of plant as well as interest on invested capital. The remainder is the profit or true value and must be reduced to present worth by giving effect to the time period in which the profit is revealed. A variety of formulas have been developed for use in the valuation of this kind. The present value of the annual dividend to be paid out over the “estimated” 20-year life of a specified mine can be determined by use of one or the other number of mine valuation formulas.
It is somewhat evident that the 20-year lifetime assumed for a typical rare earth metals mine could be changed but a number of factors bear on establishing mining rate. These include the additional proven ore reserves that can be established – which is a little difficult since the difference of the percentage concentration of an economically viable rare earth metals mine and the one that’s not is not that large. Then there are equipment costs which increase with the size of the plant, the mechanical efficiency of the plant, the market for the product – which could be depressed by overproduction – and the security of the investment. Shares of a mine with a long life typically are more preferred by investors.
Given that there are no new nuclear fission power plants being constructed in the US since the 1979 Three Mile Island nuclear fission power plant accident and the most recent Will Lyman narrated science documentary about nuclear fission power plants that mentions dysprosium and holmium nuclear poisons was probably produced between 1992 and 1995, it seems that the civilian nuclear power generation industry and the US DoD’s nuclear weapons program are no longer subsidizing America’s rare earth metals mining industry to make them economically viable enough to continue operating in the austere fiscal environment of a post Cold War world.
And given that the current main use of rare earth metals is in the consumer electronics industry and low carbon energy generation from renewable sources, it seems that the high labor costs and lack of government sourced subsidies spelled the death knell of America’s rare earth metals mining industry in the post Cold War world. Even the profitability of the Mainland China’s rare earth metals mining industry is walking on a thin line indeed when valuated using established mine valuation methods. So let’s just wish good luck to Molycorp and Sumitomo for inking that rare earth metals deal, hope you’ll make a handsome profit this 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)