3 ms·

Are there mineral/energy resources there to extract? That's the only thing that would make sense to me.

seniorThrowaway 1y ago
yes, significant amounts
ngangaga 1y ago
https://www.mining.com/web/factbox-greenlands-rich-but-largely-untapped-mineral-resources/ https://www.mining.com/web/factbox-greenlands-rich-but-large...
- perihelions 1y ago
  It's the wrong question though! The US is sitting on piles of rare earth deposits—it still doesn't mine them. It can't compete on pure cost with the mining industry in China. It's discussed extensively (e.g. here[0]) that the mining, and particularly chemical processing of ores, is labor/resource-intensive, expensive, and hazardous to ecology and to humans. It has nothing to do with the raw availability—these are super abundant ores, not rare at all, despite the name. Jack Lifton in [0] adds the perspective that rare earth processing involves a large amount of institutional knowledge, that would take time for the US to reacquire, since we forget everything when we stopped mining many decades ago. While in the interim, China has spent its time as the world's rare earth monopoly optimizing the chemical processes, widening their moat. It's like the manufacturing question, where's it about institutional knowledge and industrial ecosystems—nothing at all like oil/gas where it's solely about where the minerals are. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43953272 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43953272
  - stubish 1y ago
    > labor/resource-intensive, expensive, and hazardous to ecology and to humans This is exactly why Greenland could be needed to compete with Chinese production. With Greenland an offshore legal gray area like Guantanamo, you just need to add work camps stuffed with "Illegal Immigrants" and other Enemies of the State. In fact, why have prisoners on shore at all when it is more profitable to have them work offshore? With foreign news sources banned because of False News, the huddled masses will be educated that this is a good thing.
kevin_thibedeau 1y ago
Fishing rights and control of the northwest passage are up there.
- AlotOfReading 1y ago
  Greenland controls half of one end of the northwest passage. The other end is controlled by the US via Alaska and the Bering strait. Doesn't seem like there's much additional benefit to justify burning a bunch of international goodwill on the matter.
- chollida1 1y ago
  The northwest passage can be done by going through the Canadian archipelago. Greenland doesn't really factor into the northwest passage. You can do it all via Canadian waters and you can't do it at all without using Canadian waters so no need to even consider greenland as they don't have any waters that would speed up the transit.

yes, significant amounts

https://www.mining.com/web/factbox-greenlands-rich-but-largely-untapped-mineral-resources/ https://www.mining.com/web/factbox-greenlands-rich-but-large...

perihelions 1y ago
It's the wrong question though! The US is sitting on piles of rare earth deposits—it still doesn't mine them. It can't compete on pure cost with the mining industry in China. It's discussed extensively (e.g. here[0]) that the mining, and particularly chemical processing of ores, is labor/resource-intensive, expensive, and hazardous to ecology and to humans. It has nothing to do with the raw availability—these are super abundant ores, not rare at all, despite the name. Jack Lifton in [0] adds the perspective that rare earth processing involves a large amount of institutional knowledge, that would take time for the US to reacquire, since we forget everything when we stopped mining many decades ago. While in the interim, China has spent its time as the world's rare earth monopoly optimizing the chemical processes, widening their moat. It's like the manufacturing question, where's it about institutional knowledge and industrial ecosystems—nothing at all like oil/gas where it's solely about where the minerals are. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43953272 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43953272
- stubish 1y ago
  > labor/resource-intensive, expensive, and hazardous to ecology and to humans This is exactly why Greenland could be needed to compete with Chinese production. With Greenland an offshore legal gray area like Guantanamo, you just need to add work camps stuffed with "Illegal Immigrants" and other Enemies of the State. In fact, why have prisoners on shore at all when it is more profitable to have them work offshore? With foreign news sources banned because of False News, the huddled masses will be educated that this is a good thing.

kevin_thibedeau 1y ago

Fishing rights and control of the northwest passage are up there.

AlotOfReading 1y ago
Greenland controls half of one end of the northwest passage. The other end is controlled by the US via Alaska and the Bering strait. Doesn't seem like there's much additional benefit to justify burning a bunch of international goodwill on the matter.
chollida1 1y ago
The northwest passage can be done by going through the Canadian archipelago. Greenland doesn't really factor into the northwest passage. You can do it all via Canadian waters and you can't do it at all without using Canadian waters so no need to even consider greenland as they don't have any waters that would speed up the transit.