🪨 Rare earths: everything you ever wanted to know
Or rather: everything never wanted to know but really ought to know, especially since the device you're reading this on almost certainly has rare earths in it. Thread…
This might look like a satellite image of Mordor but it’s actually ground zero of the 21st century
Without this mine & others like it you wouldn’t have Airpods.
You wouldn’t have electric cars.
Or wind turbines.
Or much modern tech.
Bayan Obo: the world’s biggest rare earths mine
Bayan Obo is in Inner Mongolia. China. First thing you notice is the pollution. Extracting rare earths from ores is an incredibly energy-intensive, dirty business. Many mining processes involve waste tailings and lakes of toxic sludge. But especially rare earth processing.
Rare earths are a collection of 17 metals which live in their own special segment of the periodic table. They're pretty obscure and up until the 1980s were pretty fringe: used in some heat resistant alloys, fluorescent bulbs and a few other things. Quite important, not massively.
That changed in the 1980s with the invention of the neodymium-iron-boron magnet. Now, this technology isn't exactly a household name. But these magnets are incredibly incredibly important. And not just for snazzy Apple headphones (though they're in them too).
Most significantly, rare earth magnets make electric motors and dynamos far more efficient than traditional induction motors (the old school copper-wire ones). They mean you can generate wind even when there's only a slight breeze. They make electric cars go further.
When you consider that we're in the process of replacing car fleets with green ones & replacing fossil fuel power stations with wind turbines, you see how big a deal rare earth magnets are. In fact, these days when people talk abt rare earths they are mostly talking abt magnets
And here's the thing: the vast majority of rare earths, and the vast majority of RE magnets, are produced in China. Depending on how u count it we're talking abt 90%ish. So the chances are the magnets in your smartphone or earbuds or hard disk or electric car came from China.
It's the result of decades of state support/industrial strategy. For most of the 20th century the US was comfortably the biggest rare earths producer. Surprising as this sounds, the UK was quite a big player. But China now dominates. The most mines, the most processing.
While the US still mines rare earths, the ores actually get shipped to China for processing. And this brings us to an important point, possibly the most important thing you need to know about rare earths. They're not all that rare.
What makes rare earths rare isn't their distribution. There’s more cerium in the planet’s crust than there is copper or lead. Neodymium is more abundant than tin. There are lots in China. But there are lots elsewhere too. There's even rare earths in Wales & Scotland!
What really makes rare earths rare is that it's v difficult to process them. Mining isn't just abt digging up ores. It's abt separating the metal ur after from other things in that rock. It takes a LOT of work to separate rare earths from the ores and (especially) from each other
Once you realise that you realise that a lot of the coverage of rare earths has somewhat misunderstood the problem. It's certainly unsettling that China controls so much of the global supply. Esp since Beijing has occasionally signalled it may cut off global supply…
…but the solution isn't just finding a new rare earths mine. That's helpful but, as we've established, there's a fair amount of this stuff around (and unlike with eg gold or copper we've only started looking for it properly, so there's prob an awful lot we don't yet know abt).
What's REALLY needed is a better way of processing the ores. More efficient, less pollutive, not reliant on China and, ideally, one which can work on small batches of rocks rather than doing it at terrifying scale like in Bayan Obo.
Here there's some encouraging news. Work is progressing on this in US, Europe and China. But it's slow work. & it's not altogether clear there's enough investment going into it. The UK govt talks a lot about gigafactories (where car batteries will be made) but less abt this stuff
Then there's the environmental challenge. If we want electric cars we need rare earths (also battery materials but that's another story for another day). So: do we ship in rare earths from China where they're produced at Bayan Obo (or places with even worse pollution)?
Or do we start processing them here? There are a few companies planning to ship rare earths to processing plants in the UK. But they're v early stages. And these plants would almost certainly RAISE our net carbon footprint. How will that go down among environmental activists?
It brings us to a deeper issue in the UK. We've done v well at bringing down our domestic carbon emissions (white line here). But in part we've done so by deindustrialising: shutting down factories and buying in goods from overseas. Our imported emissions are quite chunky.
So things like rare earths are an interesting test case in our environmental strategy. But they're also a test case in how serious the west is about the green revolution. Because the dirty truth of net zero is that getting there involves a fair amount of mucky work.
We will still need steel for our structures (even more so for poorer countries as they develop). Copper for our electric cars. Cement for cities. Lithium, cobalt and other metals for batteries. Rare earths for motors and wind turbines and electronics.
This helps explain why commodity prices are going through the roof. Everyone wants their own green new deal. This is a massive: perhaps the biggest economic story of the coming decades. Even as we wean ourselves off fossil fuels, the world's appetite for MATERIALS is increasing.
Lots of great resources on rare earths online but of particular note and interest is this report out from @bhamenergy on critical metals - many of the pix, maps from this thread come from there: birmingham.ac.uk/research/energ…
For more on this see my @thetimes column this week about rare earths. And I'll have more on this topic (including an exciting - at least for me - announcement) in the coming weeks thetimes.co.uk/article/6ae2dd…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Anyone fancy an #Earthday data thread?
One of my frustrations with this topic is that all too often it’s portrayed in enormously over-simplistic terms: We need to stop flying! Cutting down forests is killing the planet!
So here’s some charts that show you the numbers that matter
Let’s start with this: this doughnut shows you total global emissions. About 50 gigatonnes of CO2 or equivalent. The numbers are from @WorldResources based on @IEA data which you and I can’t afford to see because they’re stuck behind a mammoth paywall.
First let’s break the doughnut into some primary categories: the vast majority is emissions from energy: everything from power stations to gas boilers to industrial processes. But also note a big chunk is emissions directly coming from the land/farming, and industry/waste
One thing we’ve learnt about #COVID stories:
Often something that looks too scary to be true isn’t quite true when you look at the small print.
Often something that looks too good to be true isn’t quite true when you look at the small print.
There have been a few scary stories in recent weeks about “hotspots” of #COVID19 around the UK.
Partly inspired by maps like this (this one from @PHE_uk) which compare local case levels with the national avg. The reddest area here is Barnsley
One problem with heatmaps is that while they do a good job of depicting regional variation, they don’t give you much context.
And they can look more dramatic when the national avg is low (as it is right now). So.
Here are three “hotspots”: Clackmannanshire, Corby & Barnsley:
Breaking: latest IMF World Economic Outlook is out.
Having flicked through, strikes me this is the most positive outlook since the onset of the pandemic (with some important provisos).
- UK, US and most advanced economies get a big vaccine-related upgrade this year & next
Here are the latest IMF GDP forecasts for G7 members. As you can see, an awful 2020 followed by pretty strong growth in 2022. UK actually strongest in G7 in 2022 (and given the OBR thinks 2022 GDP could be over 7% it’s poss the IMF is undercooking it slightly)
But look at the LEVEL of GDP growth and it’s a somewhat different story. The UK is the second last in the G7 to get back to its pre-crisis peak (Italy the slowest).
Only one of these countries, ranked here by the number of #COVID19 cases, population adjusted, is NOT on the UK govt’s “red list” which stipulates that British travellers should quarantine in a govt-approved hotel upon arrival in the UK.
Can you guess which one?
You guessed it: the answer is France.
Now, cards on the table: I left Uruguay off that chart even though it IS on the red list because, well, I was trying to make a point. Here you can see the full chart of red list countries vs France.
But as for that point…
Clearly case numbers shouldn’t be the only determinant of which countries are on or off the red list.
Clearly some of those countries on the list have dodgy data on COVID.
Clearly this isn’t just about cases but also abt VARIANTS of the virus.
Even so…
Remember when the PM announced the easing of lockdown it was going to be about data not dates? Well now we’ve had a bit more data in this feels like as good a time as any to see how we’re doing (Thread)
Strictly speaking “data not dates” meant a few crucial datapoints, as laid out in the documents at the time. In particular, there were four tests, roughly as follows: 1. Are enough people being vaccinated? 2. Are vaccines “working”? 3. Are infections surging? 4. New variants 😱
Test one: Are vaccines being deployed successfully?
Seems to be going very well. Over 90% of those aged over 70 have been vaccinated which is beyond what many expected. Over 80% for all but those aged over 100 interestingly
Short answer?
Because the population was ageing in that period. It's DEMOGRAPHY!
I'm a big fan of @dannydorling but he's got this one wrong.
As @ActuaryByDay will tell you, once you age adjust the death rates you'll see they kept falling from 2012 to 2019. This is important.
Here are some charts that illustrate the point.
First off is simple deaths per year (England & Wales).
Yes, deaths crept up post 2010, reversing a long trend of falls.
But now recall that a) the population is ageing and b) these demographic trends matter enormously
More old people in a bigger population means, all else equal, that deaths will tend to rise each year. Because older people are more likely to die than younger people. That's why actuaries age adjust their data. And if you age adjust the data here's what it looks like: