The NYT reports on how the push for environmentally friendly power soruces has driven up demand for rare-earth elements, which can have environmentally unfriendly consequences.
There are 17 rare-earth elements — some of which, despite the name, are not particularly rare — but two heavy rare earths, dysprosium and terbium, are in especially short supply, mainly because they have emerged as the miracle ingredients of green energy products. Tiny quantities of dysprosium can make magnets in electric motors lighter by 90 percent, while terbium can help cut the electricity usage of lights by 80 percent. Dysprosium prices have climbed nearly sevenfold since 2003, to $53 a pound. Terbium prices quadrupled from 2003 to 2008, peaking at $407 a pound, before slumping in the global economic crisis to $205 a pound.
China mines more than 99 percent of the world’s dysprosium and terbium. Most of China’s production comes from about 200 mines here in northern Guangdong and in neighboring Jiangxi Province.
China is also the world’s dominant producer of lighter rare earth elements, valuable to a wide range of industries. But these are in less short supply, and the mining is more regulated.
Half the heavy rare earth mines have licenses and the other half are illegal, industry executives said. But even the legal mines . . . often pose environmental hazards. . . .
The biggest user of heavy rare earths in the years ahead could be large wind turbines, which need much lighter magnets for the five-ton generators at the top of ever-taller towers. Vestas, a Danish company that has become the world’s biggest wind turbine manufacturer, said that prototypes for its next generation used dysprosium, and that the company was studying the sustainability of the supply. Goldwind, the biggest Chinese turbine maker, has switched from conventional magnets to rare-earth magnets.
Executives in the $1.3 billion rare-earths mining industry say that less environmentally damaging mining is needed, given the importance of their product for green energy technologies. Developers hope to open mines in Canada, South Africa and Australia, but all are years from large-scale production and will produce sizable quantities of light rare earths. Their output of heavy rare earths will most likely be snapped up to meet rising demand from the wind turbine industry.
PeteP says:
I want to control the world’s monoply on unobtainium.
As re “Tiny quantities of dysprosium can make magnets in electric motors lighter by 90 percent”, I would think that electric vehicles will end up taking a large share of that was well as turbines.
December 26, 2009, 10:04 amHans Clapton says:
…and of course, the alloy of dysprosium and terbium, disturbium.
December 26, 2009, 10:27 amwws says:
Luckily for us the “green energy” movement is already dying, and natural gas burning generators don’t need much of this hard to get stuff.
December 26, 2009, 12:29 pmtarpon says:
If any body ever did a real analysis of the cost of green, they would never stop laughing.
BTW: There is no such thing as renewable energy, remember what you were taught you in physics class, don’t you.
These liberal hoaxes are best when served to ignorant people.
December 26, 2009, 2:24 pmNickM says:
Hans wins the thread.
On more serious notes, I don’t care how much damage these mines may do to the environment of their surroundings in China. It will not affect the water I drink, the air I breathe, or ruin the beauty of any place I am likely to go. The cost to me is 0.
tarpon – your first point is valid. Your second point isn’t, because we’re not talking about perpetual motion machines here, but rather capturing energy from emissions that will go on on their own for millions to billions of years before the underlying reactions cease.
Nick
December 26, 2009, 2:35 pmRyan Waxx says:
In a closed system, sure. But Earth is no such closed system. Rather, it is a system being roasted with lavish amounts of energy from an external source. All of our fuels come from that source – it’s just that fossil fuels are a concentrate of this energy with a million-year production process.
Real-time collection and concentration of this energy is quite a bit harder than simply picking up masses of it already stored. That’s why the concentrates are currently far more efficent.
December 26, 2009, 4:13 pmTweets that mention The Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Mining for Green Power -- Topsy.com says:
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Joy L., Eugene Volokh. Eugene Volokh said: Mining for Green Power: The NYT reports on how the push for environmentally friendly power soruces has driven u.. http://bit.ly/8JlJr5 [...]
December 26, 2009, 4:26 pmJoseph Somsel says:
Let’s clarify some mushy wording here. Ore bodies of “rare earths” are actually fairly common and are often called “black sands.” Jacksonville Beach, Florida is one unexploited resource but their are many others including India and Brazil.
The bottleneck is in the elemental separation facilities. Separation is a difficult task and so it is not unsurprising that one country can specialize in that task and put others out of business. But there is no technical or geological reason why many more countries could be producing the separate rare earth elements. It is all economics.
This NYT article looks like a plant to me by someone with an interest in government intervention, maybe protective tariffs or production subsidies.
December 26, 2009, 11:47 pmEli Rabett says:
Concern trolling is usually reserved for the comments, and oh yes, any kind of electrical generator or motor benefits from lighter magnets, including gas turbines and wind turbines
December 27, 2009, 10:13 amPintler says:
Can you give a quick summary of the physics? My physics challenged intuition was that e.g. a hydropower generator would be pretty mass insensitive.
December 27, 2009, 10:20 amBill says:
That is why China’s current control of supplies is concerning more from it’s impact on near term job creation, innovation and the U.S. economy than national defense.
DOD will make it economical for its to-be-chosen sources to come to production, e.g. streamlined permitting, if not the aforementioned tariffs and production subsidies. They won’t be producing in 2010 (other than perhaps from existing stockpiles), but it is a matter of a few years, not decades. And the likelihood of national defense being tested during such a short period of time, and being unable to respond due to limited availability of rare earth supplies, would seem to be low, especially given that supply issues have been identified and are getting unprecedented attention from the general public as well as the U.S. government.
On the other hand, China’s limited and likely dwindling quotas is already constraining, and will continue to constrain, manufacturing, employment and, therefore, general economic activity in the U.S. Eventually, the impact of DOD off-takes and other U.S. government incentives will result in more knowledge capital outside of China, shortened mine development cycles, and increased access to financing for, and, ultimately, availability of, non-Chinese sources. With that, manufacturing of rare earth-containing products, and the employment and innovation that comes with it, can return to the U.S. But a lot of damage will be done to the U.S. economy in the meantime.
December 27, 2009, 11:29 amRadiant says:
Radiant Technologies to design and deliver different types of elements like Silicon Carbide heating element, Silicon Carbide heaters manufacturers and Heating elements manufacturers across in India.for more details visit http://www.radianttechnologies.net/
July 20, 2010, 2:44 am