Searching For Alternatives To China's Rare Earth Monopoly 199
KantIsDead writes "MIT's Technology Review adds to the ongoing discussion of China's monopoly on rare earth metals, an issue that was temporarily catapulted to national attention during China's rare earth embargo of Japan. The current article focuses on the search for alternatives to rare earth metals that would undercut China's monopoly and allow nations to develop their industry without fearing the hand of a Chinese embargo. From the article: 'In the US, the Chinese dominance of rare-earth mineral production has prompted a surge of funding focused on developing permanent magnets that use less, if any, rare-earth materials, such as nearly $7 million from the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy (ARPA-E). In one of these projects, University of Nebraska researchers are working to enhance permanent magnets made with an alloy iron and cobalt, or FeCo. This class of materials is sold today, but delivers half or less of the power of the best rare-earth-based magnets. The Nebraska researchers will focus on ways to dope the structural matrix of these alloys with traces of other elements, thereby rearranging their molecular geometry to create stronger, more durable permanent magnetic materials.'"
China is just the cheapest producer like Saudi (Score:5, Informative)
There are lots of rare earths in other countries. China is just the cheapest place to extract it. If the price goes up then other deposits will be able to be brought online economically.
Chorus Motors electric motors dont use rare earths (Score:4, Informative)
Chorus Motors is working with Boeing to put their electric wheel motors in Boeing's new aircraft. They are powered by the plane's APU instead of using the engines.
http://choruscars.com/
Their technology results in a smaller motor with higher torque that does not require an assist from an ICE at higher speeds in an electric vehicle. It also does not use any rare earths.
Molycorp is restarting the rare earths mine in the U.S. but the industry to process the ore will take 15 years to redevelop.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-28/molycorp-s-ipo-aims-at-chinese-grip-on-smart-bombs.html
"While U.S. deposits also exist in several states such as Idaho, Wyoming and Utah, they are still being explored and could take as many as 15 years before becoming fully operational, according the GAO report."
Re:China is just the cheapest producer like Saudi (Score:2, Informative)
The problem is that there aren't any other rare earth mines around, and they take a while to dig and bring online--ten years, from what I've read.
Consider having to go without new hard drives for ten years, and you know why people are suddenly becoming nervous about China suddenly deciding to embargo Japan.
That'S easy (Score:3, Informative)
1)Impose a polution tax on dirty industry. That allow the local rare earth metal mining company to start again with the incured cost of respecting polution law, while still staying competitive
2) repel polution law and allow local company to polute as much as the chinese. Human resource might still make them more expensive than the chinese though.
3) make up a miracle new technology. Good luck on that one.
Re:Looking elsewhere... (Score:4, Informative)
We're already working on it. There's a rare earths mine currently getting started up near Lake Thor in the northwest territories.
Rare earth is not rare... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:China is just the cheapest producer like Saudi (Score:3, Informative)
The problem is that there aren't any other rare earth mines around
United states had a monopoly in rare earth metals back in the 80's. I'm pretty sure those mines can be re-activated on a short notice.
Re:it's about more than rare earths (Score:3, Informative)
The attempted solution to that is documenting an ISO process for everything in manufacturing. From what I have seen, this only looks good on paper. Trying to start a new production line by the book without experience may take longer than learning from scratch.
Re:Easier alternative: drop them from the WTO (Score:2, Informative)
Good luck. China has pumped tons of money into "anti-protectionist" candidates in the US, and they preach their free trade message through the #1 news network in the US, Fox News.
(In fact, Rupert Murdoch's nth wife is a former spy for the Chinese government and since she's about 40 years from his level of senility, she gets to call a lot of the shots...).
Re:Fungible Goods (Score:1, Informative)
That's bullshit. There have been plenty of rescued miners in China. Here's 115 coming out after a week underground in April:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36157561/ns/world_news-asiapacific/ [msn.com]
That's not to say it isn't a dangerous industry, though:
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2010/1014/China-applauds-Chile-mine-rescue-avoids-awkward-safety-comparisons [csmonitor.com]
Re:That'S easy (Score:1, Informative)
The resultant force of a motor is directly proportional to the product of the magnetic flux densities of its two fields. The max magnetic flux for a rare earth magnet is orders of magnitude lower than what an electromagnet can generate. So for a given resultant force, the permanent magnet motor becomes less efficient compared to a non permanent magnet motor for larger and larger values of force. Hence why non permanent magnet motors are so popular at higher power ratings, ie in power generation, transportation, etc.
AC synchronous motors have the added benefit that since their speed is regulated by the cycling frequency, they can operate at a constant voltage in a more efficient manner.
oh yeah so permanent magnet motors can be very efficient in smaller motors, for larger traction motors in automotive applications they are much less efficient.