Such a difficult production process is one reason why the U.S. no longer mines them. Until the 1990s, the U.S. was the major supplier of rare earths, largely out of one mine in Mountain Pass, Calif., owned by oil company Unocal, now part of Chevron. Unocal shut down that mine—and processing facility—in 2002 because they could not compete with China's purer product that began to flood the market in the 1990s. Unocal "didn't think there would be a need for high-purity products," explains chemist John Burba, chief technology officer for Molycorp, the company hoping to reopen rare earth production at the Mountain Pass Mine.
Plus, the operations were not exactly environmentally friendly. "Back in the 1990s the plant was sending 850 gallons of wastewater per minute down a pipeline into evaporation ponds," Burba notes. "It was a devil's mixture because of the chemistry they employed." In addition, the rare earths at Mountain Pass are mixed with radioactive thorium, requiring special care in handling and disposal.
The whole slew of rare earth elements are a challenge to separate because of their chemical similarity—and they are never found alone. "The challenge with rare earths is they always occur together," GE's Iorio explains. "There are processing costs to separate them out from each other."
Regardless, the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC) wanted to purchase Unocal—and its California rare earth asset—in 2005, a move the U.S. military blocked, according to Burba. Now Molycorp wants to restart operations by 2012 using a new process, which will require Molycorp to essentially rebuild the entire operation at a cost of $500 million. The process employs a strong acid and a base to separate the rare earths—the so-called chlor–alkali solvent extraction method—but it still will not produce pure rare earths; rather it will yield oxides of cerium, lanthanum, praseodymium and neodymium.
In essence, Mountain Pass will become a chemical plant, sucking up electricity and steam from an on-site natural gas–fired boiler. In addition, the wastewater of the process will be recycled back to produce the strong acid and base necessary to start the process all over again—hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide. "Mining is a very small part of our operation," Burba says, noting that mining the ore containing the rare earths is only 10 percent of his company's cost. "The vast majority of what we do is advanced chemistry."
Of course, there will still be by-products—such as the residual ore, or tailings, from the mining and separation as well as calcium carbonate, magnesium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide from the chemical process, along with that pesky thorium. But the primary salt from the chlor–alkali process is sodium chloride (otherwise known as table salt), which will be recycled back into the process using some of the steam generated on site and use to make new acid and base using a chlor-alkali unit. "It's a big saltwater loop," Burba explains. "Our water consumption is 10 percent or less of what had been done historically at this site."
By next year, the site hopes to produce 2.7 million kilograms of rare earth oxides a year—separating the elements from the ore using a liquid ion-exchange process. By 2015, they hope to be at full production, producing 18 million kilograms of various rare earth oxides a year. "We have greater than 30 years of mining capacity at 40 million pounds per year," Burba says.
But that only represents 6 percent of the present global market, which is still growing. The U.S. Government Accountability Office estimates it will take seven to 15 years to find new rare earth deposits, build the infrastructure to process them, and make them available to manufacturers. "This is not like going out and panning for gold," Burba notes. "This processing requires a huge amount of chemical processing. You have to have good infrastructure."
See what we're tweeting about
16 Comments
Add CommentComputers, cell phones, and compact fluorescent bulbs are constantly being discarded. There should be a systematic recycling of these appliances for their rare earths. Hybrid automobiles will also soon be a significant discard. They also should be mined for rare earths. It is sort of diabolic that the greener you want to be, the more processing there has to be of the necessary rare earths.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank goodness solar materials are mostly made from sand.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisVery odd to see a big shell oil advertising emblem posted to an article criticizing an alternative energy.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/global_climate_change_lobby/
Economic recycling of rare earth elements (REEs) -- as well as increased production -- both will be critical if we are to meet rapidly rising global REE demand. Our company (Molycorp, Inc.) is now looking at recycling in two areas: REEs used in compact fluorescent lighting, and REE alloy left over from permanent magnet manufacture. Both areas offer great promise. In fact, we have designed our new, soon-to-be-built, state-of-the-art REE processing facility in California with eye toward maximizing recycling opportunities, with a highly flexible circuit design; an ability to co-process recycled material with primary production; and the lowest cost operation in industry.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere are considerable diposits of neodymium in our
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMojavi Desert in southern California. However, our senator, Diane Feinstein, saw to it that the desert be
made off limits to all mining there through having it declared a National Monument. Interestingly, her husband, Richard Blum, has vast business interest China, which has the only other known deposit of neodymium.
The comments identifies the need for reprocessing and recycling of those items that utilize these rare earths. This should be a given for all technologic processes to harvest all reuseable products used in their construction. The 'losses' that occur in reprocessing can be readily acquired from China but may not remain a market of suitable size to warrant China continuing to produce these rare earths for American manufacturing opeations.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMarket demand will drive the Federal government to remove certain areas from 'protected' status. This may also be accomplished by allowing limited extraction of these rare earths for American markets. Public opinion will usually overcome greed factors that surround political figures in their actions for the 'public good'.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJust to play the devil's advocate, we should now invest heavily into wind and EV technologies that make us dependent on foreign resources whose extraction produced horrible ecological destruction? Isn't this essentially the same formula that produced gasoline price increases from $0.25/gal. in the 1960s to several dollars per gallon in a few short years?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's a sucker's play: when our infrastructure is eventually dependent on diminishing foreign resources their costs will rise accordingly.
By the way, I'd wager that if the discrete costs of producing these rare Earth elements were identifiable in an auditable accounting (even ignoring any eventual environmental reclamation costs), we'd find that they are currently being sold at a loss on the producer's bet to 'develop markets'. Suckers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wish I shared your optimizm. I see no sign of opening the Mojavi to mining. When do you think it will happen.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI wish I shared your optimizm. I see no sign of opening the Mojavi to mining. When do you think it will happen.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe might remember that powerful electric motors were once made using just iron laminations and copper wire. They were heavier and larger, but they worked very well. In fact, capability to control the field strength gave them better speed control.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe best thing to do is quit installing Wind Turbines. Wind MUST be complemented by Fossil Fuel power generation. It is most practical, and in most cases unavoidable to use fast spooling NG power plants to complement Wind. MOST of the total Wind/NG system energy - 80 to 90% will come from the NG - and cycling inefficiencies induced in that 80-90% will waste as much fuel as the Wind Energy would theoretically save. A Total SCAM to increase consumption of the temporary glut in NG supplies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWind Energy DOES NOT reduce emissions:
http://www.masterresource.org/2009/11/wind-integration-incremental-emissions-from-back-up-generation-cycling-part-i-a-framework-and-calculator/
Emissions INCREASE, due to Wind Energy in Colorado:
http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/wp-content/uploads/BENTEK-How-Less-Became-More.pdf
We BADLY need those high strength Neodymium magnets for Electric Vehicles, E-Bikes, E scooters & HEV's. The Prius uses two PMSM/G's. An 18 kw & a 33 kw. They are especially needed for the flat pancake Wheel Hub Motors, which I believe is the best way to make E-vehicles. The vastly improved efficiency of Electric Vehicles over ICE Vehicles is a much more important use of Neodymium magnets than way-too-costly Wind Turbines. Examples, the Crusher UGV and UQM high efficiency 150 kw wheel motors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2Kh7FVgDCU&feature=related
http://www.uqm.com/pdfs/powerphase%20150%20spec%20sheet%20update%209-21-09.pdf
Afghanistan has rare earth element (REE) concentrations. First discovered by the Soviets after their invasion, it was more completely mapped out by our USGS.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientists at Leeds University in the UK found that they could extract neodymium out of Titanium Dioxide processing waste water.
China thought that their demand for REEs would match their exports by 2012, until the recession hit and they projected 2014. But then the taxpayer subsidized demand for wind turbines moved the equilibrium forward to 2012. China is flexing its power to force manufacturers to relocate to China.
Can you say MADE IN CHINA?
Wind power is extremely expensive, and it is driving up the price of the REE commodities. We should slow down the subsidizing of wind turbines so as to ensure we have enough REE supply for more critical uses.
Coincidentally, rare earth mining (REE) and processing in China is creating a huge environmental pollution problem. Some of the waste water ponds are flushing poisons into the Yellow River and into the Pacific. And Chinese REE processing air pollution drifts over North America.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile environmentalists pretend their solutions are 'green' the reality is they're forcing an increase of source pollution.
For more, read China’s Rare Earth Elements Industry:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat Can the West Learn? March 2010
Institute for the Analysis of Global Security (IAGS)
http://www.iags.org/rareearth0310hurst.pdf
Cindy Hurst is an analyst for the U.S. Army’s Foreign Military Studies Office,
Fort Leavenworth, KS.
Mountain Pass is in the Mojave.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe water (needed in quantity for extraction)out west, is overallocated among AZ, NV, and vastly overpopulated CA.
Commentators ignore the immense military use of materiel better used for peaceful purposes.
The military since Iraq/Afgh, has taken 44% of US tax dollars (although military budget is about 1/4 of national spending, many other programs pay for themselves, resultiing in the 44% figure of waste, through fear and manipulation of other peoples and nations).
Should US citizens awaken, such materials & research could be increased immensely by cutting military budgets by 80%. The US spends 50% of all money spent in the world for military purposes.
Ignored in commentary is the impact of continuing and increasing energy use. Global warming appears to be accelerating faster than predictions.
It is simplistic to presume that mining every possible source of anything is a viable answer to economic or supply problems.
Without a living, breathing biological world that feeds us, technology will not improve, or far less, support each of our lives.
The Mojave does not automatically exist for extractive industry or wasteful destructive activity of any kind. As much is tied up by military as by preservation.
It is a home to myriad species, a part of a mysterious universe which exploration (scientific AND that basic to our original nature) and knowledge opens up a broader, more fulfilled life, rather than miserable dependence on evermore miniscule applications of technology.
To limit impacts on the environment and atmosphere,while ceasing to live in a universe in which one perceives constant lack, here is aclear order of priorities to consider:
1. Reduce the overbloomed human population (I suggest through reduced number of offspring, rather than the catastrophic methods which will occur absent this)
2. Reduce demand - e.g. the bloated US military. Depend less on constant use of technologies nonexistent before late 20th century. Magnets to reintroduce electrical power through hybrid braking are more important than the latest throwaway cell phone with tricks. Humans lived full and rich lives for well over 100,000 yrs without those.
3. I understand that fast breeder nuclear reactors can use and reuse many radioactive materials associated with rare earths.
3. Recycling military equipment for peaceful purposes will free vast quantities of materials of all kinds. Do you recycle as much as you can? Recycling without fail is this priority.
Technologies vital to preservation of biodiversity are priority 1.