> “Getting rare earths from exploration to the mighty magnet involves five to six distinct stages — and right now, what’s in Greenland is still only in the exploration stage,” Tracy Hughes, founder and executive director at industry group the Critical Minerals Institute, told CNBC.
> “Rare earths in Greenland won’t materially move markets in the next decade,” she added.
Further, rare earth deposits aren't particularly scarce,the US already has a few, Australia has a good many and is over eager to allow US companies access.
The rarity in the pipeline in concentrate processing.
After the mechanical digging and crude physical seperate of good dirt from bad dirt the real drama begins - the chemical seperation and purification of those things that are desired in the forms that are useful.
Now you're dealing with acres of acid pools and radioactive waste as part of capital intensive processing plants that take years to build and establish.
China went all in on processing decades ago, the western world did not.
Seizing Greenland is no shortcut, particularly when there's no need to "acquire" it when the US already has all the access it needs.
I'm not in favour of the WH proposal in any case, but specifically there's no economic justifier in materials extraction, strategically. It would be more sensible to continue to invest in onshore and close ally mining and production/processing, and get source diversity.
If the problem was sourcing them, entering into a strategic alliance with Danish and Greenland interests is pretty straightforward. I can't see this justifying state seizure in any circumstances.
Tech investors are happy to support colonization and theft from other nations like Venezuela and Greenland. These people are so evil, they’re convincing me of the necessity of a wealth tax to contain the threat they represent to the world.
The last bit says it all:
> “Getting rare earths from exploration to the mighty magnet involves five to six distinct stages — and right now, what’s in Greenland is still only in the exploration stage,” Tracy Hughes, founder and executive director at industry group the Critical Minerals Institute, told CNBC.
> “Rare earths in Greenland won’t materially move markets in the next decade,” she added.
Correct.
Further, rare earth deposits aren't particularly scarce,the US already has a few, Australia has a good many and is over eager to allow US companies access.
The rarity in the pipeline in concentrate processing.
After the mechanical digging and crude physical seperate of good dirt from bad dirt the real drama begins - the chemical seperation and purification of those things that are desired in the forms that are useful.
Now you're dealing with acres of acid pools and radioactive waste as part of capital intensive processing plants that take years to build and establish.
China went all in on processing decades ago, the western world did not.
Seizing Greenland is no shortcut, particularly when there's no need to "acquire" it when the US already has all the access it needs.
I'm not in favour of the WH proposal in any case, but specifically there's no economic justifier in materials extraction, strategically. It would be more sensible to continue to invest in onshore and close ally mining and production/processing, and get source diversity.
If the problem was sourcing them, entering into a strategic alliance with Danish and Greenland interests is pretty straightforward. I can't see this justifying state seizure in any circumstances.
Tech investors are happy to support colonization and theft from other nations like Venezuela and Greenland. These people are so evil, they’re convincing me of the necessity of a wealth tax to contain the threat they represent to the world.
Ghouls.