China Proposes Further Export Curbs On Battery, Critical Minerals Tech (reuters.com) 92
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: China's commerce ministry has proposed export restrictions on some technology used to make battery components and process critical minerals lithium and gallium, a document, opens new tab issued on Thursday showed. If implemented, they would be the latest in a series of export restrictions and bans targeting critical minerals and the technology used to process them, areas in which Beijing is globally dominant. Their announcement precedes the inauguration later this month of Donald Trump for a second term during which he is expected to use tariffs and various trade restrictions against other countries, in particular China. [...]
The proposed expansion and revisions of restrictions on technology used to extract and process lithium or prepare battery components could also hinder the overseas expansion plans of major Chinese battery makers, including CATL, Gotion, and EVE Energy. Some technologies to extract gallium would also be restricted. Thursday's announcement does not say when the proposed changes, which are open for public comment until Feb. 1, could come into force. Adam Webb, head of battery raw materials at consultancy Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, notes that China retains a 70% grip on the global processing of lithium into the material needed to make EV batteries. "These proposed measures would be a move to maintain this high market share and to secure lithium chemical production for China's domestic battery supply chains," he said. "Depending on the level of export restrictions imposed, this could pose challenges for Western lithium producers hoping to use Chinese technology to produce lithium chemicals."
The proposed expansion and revisions of restrictions on technology used to extract and process lithium or prepare battery components could also hinder the overseas expansion plans of major Chinese battery makers, including CATL, Gotion, and EVE Energy. Some technologies to extract gallium would also be restricted. Thursday's announcement does not say when the proposed changes, which are open for public comment until Feb. 1, could come into force. Adam Webb, head of battery raw materials at consultancy Benchmark Mineral Intelligence, notes that China retains a 70% grip on the global processing of lithium into the material needed to make EV batteries. "These proposed measures would be a move to maintain this high market share and to secure lithium chemical production for China's domestic battery supply chains," he said. "Depending on the level of export restrictions imposed, this could pose challenges for Western lithium producers hoping to use Chinese technology to produce lithium chemicals."
Short term solution (Score:5, Insightful)
That's probably a trigger they should be reluctant to pull, because China's only currently 70% of the market.
It might take some time to change, but between other countries starting to exploit their own lithium resources and battery technology evolving, restricting exports just speeds up the process where China loses market dominance and doesn't get the money any longer.
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't studied chemistry since high school, clearly but why not making batteries out of sodium-ion or potassium-ion...
Re: (Score:2)
Sodium is already a thing (e.g. Natron Energy), but something from high school chemistry that might have stuck is that as you move further down that column, the metals become more (and dangerously so) reactive.
Re: (Score:2)
It's been a few decades since my last chemistry class too, but I di remember from my breakfast box this morning that sodium and potassium are both essential nutrients in a person's diet. I'm surprised to see someone label them as dangerously reactive.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, lithium is no sloucher here either ;-) but yea, less so than sodium and even less so than potassium. So good point. Though the energy density due to it's smaller size and more electron mobility is on the Lithium side. Cost not so.
Re:Short term solution (Score:5, Informative)
why not making batteries out of sodium-ion or potassium-ion...
Sodium batteries work okay for static applications like grid storage but are too heavy for mobile applications like EVs and phones.
Sodium batteries have some advantages: They work better in cold weather, can charge faster than lithium, and can endure more cycles.
I don't know of any reason to use potassium for batteries since sodium is cheaper and lighter, but they do exist: potassium-ion battery [wikipedia.org].
NaIon Batteries (Score:5, Interesting)
I remember reading that China is actually using NaIon batteries in a number of EVs today. They don't have the range of LiIon, but are much cheaper.
Looking, it seems that they're just starting/started this year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
They're boasting 200 wh/kg. [arstechnica.com]
Lithium Ion didn't exceed that until ~2000.
Basically, it's looking that if you need an EV with 250-300 miles range and extreme durability/cold weather performance, NaIon may be your choice, while if you need 300-400 miles or more, LiIon will remain the choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Energy density. Sodium is used in batteries where weight and volume does not matter as much as in electronics or cars. Say for power grit (or home) storage.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah they're just trying to squeeze anyone setting up import/export restrictions and tariffs on China.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of the predatory capitalists in China work for the CCP, that behemoth parasite sucking the soul of China dry.
Re: (Score:1)
China has toughly 1.5 billion citizens.
The CPC has about 150million members.
That is 10% of the population, or 30% of the people in voting age.
Perhaps you should read a little bit up about China?
What you learned 40 years ago in school: is no longer true.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, someone who actually knows that it's the Communist Party of China (CPC), not the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)! Will wonders never cease? :-)
Re: (Score:1)
I consider CCP an american meme ..
No idea why they want to demonify a Country, its Population and its Citizens: instead of working with them together.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's the whole ethos of the elite that everything has to be a zero-sum game. It's not enough that they win whatever imaginary competition they set up, the "other" (whoever it is that day) has to lose as well. Not something that I can easily comprehend.
Re: (Score:1)
"other" [...] has to lose as well. Not something that I can easily comprehend.
Same.
Win - Win seems no longer to be a thing.
Not even in business.
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.androidauthority.c... [androidauthority.com]
And not relying on China or other states that have deep seated hate for western ideology. Russia has shown that, and China may be hesitant but when push comes to shove they will cut off countries they don't like.
Re:Short term solution (Score:5, Insightful)
In China's case... Trump's been telling the world he's going to fuck China over as soon as he takes office. While China's not the most cooperative world citizen, in this particular case the move is a warning to the US to play nice, not just China being China. It'd be kind of ridiculous not to expect China to respond to a pending attack on its economy.
Re: (Score:2)
One thing to realize about el Bunko is that he never leans on anyone who can bite back hard. He doesn't do it because he has a result in mind except being able to declare some sort of stupid victory or he can cause pain the entity on the other side, he isn't particular. He likes "victories" because he can leverage them into money. He likes inflicting pain because, in a demented way, it makes him feel like a mensch.
China is a target merely because of its size and tentacles and the Maggots' ability to generat
Re: Short term solution (Score:1)
> deep seated hate for western ideology
Wow. How can you have it so backwards?
Unless, you call being bossed around and surrounded by military bases as "ideology" in which case, you have a point, but who would blame them for hating THAT?
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure why I'm responding to this, since it's so deluded and misinformed and presumably contributed by a pro-tyranny influencing campaign.
You clearly don't understand anything about the difference between autocracy and democracy.
Re: (Score:1)
You clearly don't understand anything about the difference between autocracy and democracy.
Neither do you.
In autocratic USA, Trump can do what ever he wants.
His party, the Republicans, have say what so ever. Unless you call a republican congressman or a republican senator: a voter.
In China, every member of the party can vote over every topic that comes to mind. Inside of the CPC, obviously. And law makers, aka the Parliament are obliged to make those votes into law.
There is no way to weasle out from the vot
Re: (Score:1)
Daily reminder: Those who refer to Chinese Communist Party as "CPC" are either CCP propagandists or CCP propaganda victims.
Re: (Score:2)
Or they actually know what the name of the group ruling the government of China is, and we can't have that. Ignorance rules! Stamp out the intelligentsia! People who actually know the facts about something need to shut up so that we can spout our uninformed opinions handed to us by our rulers! /s
Re: (Score:2)
The origin of the word is in Chinse official propaganda outlets pushing the angle that "those that call us CCP are racist, those who are not racist call us by a different name we ourselves specify" in a long standing campaign to delegitimize their critics.
The name caught on among the propagandists and their victims. Everyone else still calls them CCP.
Re: (Score:1)
It is the opposite around.
There is no CCP.
The official name is Communist Party of China.
CCP is only a catchy abbreviation in an Wikipedia article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Probably because it is easier to remember? No idea. I find CPC more catchy and more easy to remember than CCP.
CCP is a company in Islands ... hoster and developer of the MMORPG "Eve Online".
Abbreviation
CCP (common)
CPC (official)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd call you a China propagandist, but the problem is that I know you're stupid enough to believe that Germany controls wind, global warming has made it so Northern Europe no longer gets temperatures below -20C in winter and other similar products of top tier idiocy.
So I'm voting "victim of Chinese propaganda" in this case.
Re: Short term solution (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Which lawsuit is Xi trying to distract from by having border troops fight Indians? What about his order for generals to be ready to take Taiwan by military force by 2027? What lawsuit motivates the repeated, intentional collisions of Chinese ships with other countries' fishing vessels in international waters? Do Chinese ships drag anchors and break undersea cables because of some lawsuit? Did a long-ago lawsuit compel China to annex Tibet and continue to bully Nepal?
Re: (Score:1)
Australia provides more than 1/2 the lithium for the world and at current rates enough to last a century without searching for more.
Re:Short term solution (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/r... [forbes.com] says Australia "only" supplies 43% of the world's lithium, and has "only" 72 years of proven reserves at that rate. Chile is the current #2 supplier, with 28.5% of supply and 50% more reserves than Australia (in tonnes, so they have 164 years of reserves at their current rates).
But guruevi is much more wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, the Salar de Ununi in Bolivia has the largest deposits on the planet. Their government's insistence that anymining take into consideration the worker safety and environmental preservation is the current roadblock to exploitation.
Re: Short term solution (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Keep in mind that this is only on the raw materials.. If you want to buy a complete battery pack, or even in individual cells, go ahead.
Since China already has a big lead on packs and cells, they probably think that this will slow foreign development and competition in the medium term. Unlike China, the West isn't likely to throw serious money at replacing those supplies quickly.
They beat us at our own game.
Re: (Score:2)
You hit the nail right on the head. These 'rare' minerals aren't actually rare at all. We all know this is targeted at the US and the US has more than enough of these materials which it can cultivate. Some of the materials they are restricting are literally waste materials from zinc mining that is already happening in the US and could easily be captured rather than thrown away.
Re: (Score:2)
could easily be captured
If you have several years to set up the financing, get the permits, build the facility, and line up buyers. In the meantime US industry (what there is left of it) is starving.
No one in Brainwashington seems to have noticed that absolutely none of the sanctions that they've been throwing around the world like confetti (over 40 countries and literally thousands of individuals and corporations) have ever had the desired effect. As the dieting industry says, "If you always do what you've always done you'll al
Re: (Score:2)
Or MAGA can wave a magic legislative wand and eliminate all the red tape for permits, building facilities, etc and they can be operational in six months.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, you don't work on infrastructure projects, I take it. Just the financing takes months to set up, the selection, design and actual construction of the facility can take longer, and ordering, configuring, installing and testing the equipment nearly as long. The permitting process is only a minor obstruction in most cases.
Re: (Score:2)
"Ah, you don't work on infrastructure projects, I take it. Just the financing takes months to set up, the selection, design and actual construction of the facility can take longer, and ordering, configuring, installing and testing the equipment nearly as long."
Yeah at a major enterprise [they are as bad as government] but a small company can do the same thing in a few months with most of the time being the construction... at least if they don't have to worry about all the massive delays as each stage gets p
Re: (Score:2)
Lithium is not a critical resource, it's everywhere, even seawater. They happen to produce a lot of it, but other production facilities are coming online worldwide and any market position they currently hold is only temporary.
Rare Earth Elements are also not necessarily rare, deposits are found worldwide (especially in Russia), just the extraction process is so filthy and expensive to set up that most deposits are unexploited. Again, other production facilities are starting to come online.
China responds to Trump and BeauSD posts it here. (Score:1, Flamebait)
Someone with no understanding of international trade has promised tariff's. China has responded.
The story here shouldn't be "China has responded" but rather "Trump is a moron child who know nothing of international trade."
But hey, it's a SlashDot Weekend and BeauSD is hard at work parrotting... crap.
Re: (Score:1)
If I recall correctly, during Trump's last term when he was attacking Canada, we responded with actions that targeted things Trump personally cared about. I don't recall it being particularly effective, but you can't just let him bully you or he'll take everything.
It'll be interesting to see how we respond this time. So far it's been, "Oh yes, Mr. Trump, let me lick your balls clean", probably because Canada's right is rising as "the only counter to Trump" and the US-funded media in Canada has been consta
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> I suspect he will get along much better with PM Poilievre than with Turdeau, who we already know he rightly has little respect for.
So, you're a right-wing moron who talks at Trump's level. Poilievre is a hateful power-hungry bastard and much like a MAGA, you're unlikely to enjoy his government after you finish orgasming over 'beating the liberulz'.
You couldn't even hold back the spittle for ONE post on social media. Take a look in the mirror for a minute and ask yourself why that might be... because
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Shhh don't tell anyone but he already put in tariffs before, Biden actually increased them and in both cases it has worked out well for the US.
Sanctions work in both directions. (Score:4, Insightful)
Something that all politicians fail to grasp. Sanctions are great whilst you have a monopoly on some aspect of the trade.
Both parties here are incentivising alternatives.
Re: (Score:2)
One thing to realize that this isn't just China locking up their export of rare earth materials, but the technologies used to extract them.
Given China's dominance in this area, one can presume that they've figured out a number of techniques to make it easier/cheaper/faster. So blocking that stuff is like the USA trying to restrict something like night vision technology, chip manufacturing, and such.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that Chinese industrial technology comes from the US in the first place that may be true but I doubt will hamper the US for long or stop the US from increasing domestic production.
Re: (Score:2)
That they stole most of their initial technology doesn't mean that they can't pull the same thing the Japanese did and eventually come to dominate, to develop new technology from there, update systems, etc...
It's like how unlike the USA and Europe, they're managing to build nuclear reactors on time and on budget.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case they can do all that and it still won't matter. They don't just need to improve technology, in order for it to matter they need the US to fail to do so and that seems unlikely.
Re: (Score:2)
See nuclear power. Unless we unfuck our ability to do large projects, it'll be difficult.
I mean, if it is bad enough, we'll still do it. But we do need to unscrew our ability to build big things.
Re: (Score:2)
"Sanctions are great whilst you have a monopoly on some aspect of the trade."
The US does have a monopoly on some aspect of trade, the largest economy/market in the world. China had a few reports fudged to try to claim they'd taken pole position but the reality is that while substantial they are a distant second and that China's own economic position is very much dependent on the US. But for the US China is just Walmart... it might cost a few more bucks but we can always shop at target instead.
Re: (Score:2)
That would be a great point if we were actually talking about target vs walmart. It's a metaphor... China has cheap crap that anyone else can produce and produce better. They are the store and aren't a good one, the consumer can go somewhere else but the US is the consumers and the store is fscked without consumers.
Re: (Score:2)
"If that were true they'd already be doing it."
Why would you expect them to be doing it when China is cheaper? Cheaper tends to preempt better because most consumers don't know better or don't find out about quality problems until it is too late.
But in many cases goods are or can be produced in more than one place already and that is why tariffs have been so successful, replace target in this metaphor with a vendor known for quality and that vendor would be the second largest manufacturer... which is the US
Re: (Score:1)
Sanctions are great, for a very short period of time. We limit their access to high-end chips and lithography equipment and what has been the result? They're developing their own lithography systems and their new phone chips appear to exceed Apple's. We sanction Russia and shut off their access to the petrodollar, and what has been the result? A short blip in their economy, and now 2/3 of the countries in the world, representing 80% of the planet's population, ignore US sanctions and multiple countries
Perfect (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what has been needed in order for nations to finally to boost domestic production and refinement. Where there is a money to be made, there will be someone to provide a product.
Re: (Score:2)
Current lithium mining methods are an environmental nightmare. Money will be made, but the only thing that will 'trickle down' will be a poisoned environment you used to outsource to China.
Supercilious much? (Score:5, Informative)
Current lithium mining methods are an environmental nightmare.
No, this is a melodramatic misrepresentation. The environmental damage from ore mining is localized and when the mine is depleted then the area can be restored.
However, CHINA DOES NOT MINE THE LITHIUM THAT IT EXPORTS. What China does is import an obscene amount of lithium ore (mostly from Australia), refines it, and then exports it.
It would be wise if you learned about topics before making boisterous claims that should embarrass you.
Re: (Score:2)
This is actually a very good point. The US should hijack the ore from australia... not that I think we have any shortage in our landfills.
Re: (Score:1)
Lithium is not mined from "ore".
It is extracted from water that has lithium dissolved.
IFF China is importing ores from Australia, the ore is about something else, and the Lithium in it is a side product.
No one mines Lithium from ore, makes no sense at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks to the link.
That is interesting.
Probably they have not enough water there to frack/crack the rock and use water to get the minerals out?
Re: (Score:2)
Lithium is not mined from "ore".
It is extracted from water that has lithium dissolved.
Sure, buddy. "Lithium is found in rock ores, which are mined and crushed, or in briny water, where it can be extracted using evaporation." [mit.edu]
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, and that is how much of the percentage world wide?
Is it even above 1%?
Re: (Score:2)
So why is Australia exporting ore? The closer to the final product the more income one can get. Yet, they do not want to refine it in Australia, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Australia is a primary producer. Australia exports massive amounts of iron ore, wool, grains, etc. which is turned into manufactured goods overseas. It's always been that way. Australia has pretty much exited oil refining, steel refining and manufacturing cars.
Re: (Score:1)
No they are not.
You pump water down into the earth, and pump it up again.
What the fuck is there environmental harming?
Re: Perfect (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
future (Score:3)
In the dystopian future, EVs will be stolen and melted down for rare earths and other needed materials.