The U.S. is now dependent on foreign sources for critical metals like graphite, vanadium and manganese. The Critical Metals Report interviews Michael and Chris Berry.
PETALUMA, CA (The Critical Metals Report) – The Critical Metals Report: In a presentation at the China Investment Conference in December, you said that over the last 20 years the U.S. government has mismanaged its supplies of critical metals to the point where it depends almost exclusively on foreign sources. How did this happen?
Michael Berry: It’s just now starting to dawn on Washington that we don’t have a stockpile. We had a stockpile through World War I and World War II (WWII) that was necessary to our national security. The U.S. was the biggest producer of rare earth elements (REEs) in the 1970s and 1980s. But then we allowed China to undercut our prices and we shut down the Mountain Pass mine, which was one of the largest if not the largest producer of rare earths in the world.
We lost not only production and access to REEs, which are critical for weapons systems, automobiles, alternative energy and a number of other applications, but we lost the processing chain that actually integrates and creates the metal, creates the alloy and magnets, and integrates it into material. China now controls these markets. There are four or five pieces of legislation pending in Washington, but it will take a decade or more to replace and rebuild these crucial supply chains.
Chris Berry: When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the idea of a unipolar world came into vogue and I think the United States took its eye off the ball by selling off stockpiles of numerous metals. Security of supply was not viewed in the same light as it was during the Cold War. Labor was offshored, which minimizes costs and fattens balance sheets. But the U.S. made a strategic mistake when we offshored technology as well. Other countries around the world now have access to this intellectual property and are using it to build their own industrial and manufacturing bases. It’s going to be quite a while before the United States regains its footing, but we are seeing moves recently to rectify this situation.
TCMR: How involved should the U.S. government be in the metals supply chain?
CB: There is a lot of mistrust and antipathy toward the government getting involved in what are traditionally viewed as private-sector activities. But there is a role for the government to encourage investment with respect to critical and other metals, whether or not it centers on loan guarantees or tax breaks, for instance. Government-run and private-sector defense companies require these raw materials that we are depending on foreign countries to supply us with. However, I’m not entirely convinced as to how involved government should be. It’s a very slippery slope.
TCMR: Over the last 50 years, Japan built what is now the third largest economy. It did so by importing almost all of its raw materials and metals from foreign countries. Why is what’s good for an economy like Japan’s bad for America’s economy?
CB: The difference now is that there are more people competing today for a finite amount of resources. Today, there are 3.5 billion people in the emerging world who are striving for a higher quality of life, which is underpinned by resource demand. In this environment, a sensible natural resource policy is an absolute imperative. World War II was fought for many reasons, but one of those reasons was Japan’s dependence on natural resources to power its economy-for example, rubber. When viewed through this prism, it’s not hard to view future conflicts over resources as a given.
TCMR: Chris, what are some examples of metals that the U.S. is critically short on?
CB: Unfortunately, it’s a rather lengthy list. In 2009, the U.S. Geological Survey compiled a list of a select grouping of non-fuel minerals to demonstrate U.S. import reliance. The U.S. was 100% dependent on imports of 19 of them and at least 75% dependent on 31. Some of them are front-page news, like rare earth elements, but others are more obscure but just as important, such as manganese, vanadium, tungsten, antimony and graphite.
TCMR: What are these metals’ primary uses in the new economy over the next decade?
CB: Graphite, for example, is currently used in steel making, brake linings, lubricants and refractories. There are uses for graphite where I expect supernormal growth, however, such as in lithium ion batteries, nuclear reactors and fuel cell technology. It’s by now a well-known fact that there’s between 10 and 20 times more graphite in a lithium ion battery than there is lithium and you need large-flake, high-purity graphite. Based on what I have seen in my travels recently, I think vehicle electrification is here to stay. More graphite is going to be needed for vehicle electrification, whether it’s used in traditional automotives like the Chevy Volt or in electric bicycles, which are seeing explosive demand in countries like in China.
China produces 75% of global graphite supply (in a total market of 1.2 million tons (Mt) per year) and so as the country continues to build its own industries that require more graphite, an increase in domestic consumption must ensue, to the detriment of those companies outside of China.
For the rest of this interview, please go to Mineweb.com website: http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/view/mineweb/en/page72102?oid=142933&sn=Detail&pid=102055