3 ms·
This article keeps rearing its head every 6 months/year, even on HN (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1886895 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1886895).
by drucken 14y ago
This article keeps rearing its head every 6 months/year, even on HN (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1886895 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1886895).
It will be a very long time before mining the seabed for rare earth minerals will be anywhere near as economically viable (or even environmentally-friendly) as traditional mining.
It is just that everyone has relied on China for so long for this dirty (literal sense) industry that they are now effectively being held hostage. It is not due to the fact that "rare earth minerals" are actually rare and for a large part of the 20th century, the US, for example, was one of the primary producers and exporters.
- jsm386 14y agoIt does seem like there has been progress made/realistic goals in mind. I submitted this Times piece earlier today: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/science/vast-deposits-of-gold-and-other-ores-lure-seabed-miners.html?hp http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/10/science/vast-deposits-of-g... There are contracts for delivery in place: Meanwhile, Tong Ling, China’s largest importer of copper concentrates and one of the world’s largest copper smelters, recently signed a deal with Nautilus for more than a million tons of Pacific sulfide ores per year — an amount equal to about 5 percent of the world’s copper production.