China Threatens to ‘Weaponize’ Rare Earths in Trade War Escalation

[thackney]

We're discussing two different things. I'm talking about having the ability to achieve energy independence, in the event of an economic or full on shooting war. Without the expanded refining capabilities, we cannot.

While a certain amount of the light sweet crude oil is being used domestically and more of it is planned to be used, it make little economic sense to spend money to modify your refinery to use more expensive oil.

When building a new unit, it can make sense to reduce risks by optimizing it for locally produced oil.  Most of the new expansions for the past few years around the gulf coast have done this.

For example:

https://news.exxonmobil.com/press-release/exxonmobil-proceed-new-crude-unit-part-beaumont-refinery-expansion

[edpc]

While a certain amount of the light sweet crude oil is being used domestically and more of it is planned to be used, it make little economic sense to spend money to modify your refinery to use more expensive oil.

When building a new unit, it can make sense to reduce risks by optimizing it for locally produced oil.  Most of the new expansions for the past few years around the gulf coast have done this.

For example:

https://news.exxonmobil.com/press-release/exxonmobil-proceed-new-crude-unit-part-beaumont-refinery-expansion

Except, we have the benefit of hindsight, in 2019. Would it have been better to expand our domestic production and refinery capabilities since Gulf War I, or spend trillions on entanglements in the Middle East? That cheap oil has actually been quite expensive.

[thackney]

Except, we have the benefit of hindsight, in 2019. Would it have been better to expand our domestic production and refinery capabilities since Gulf War I, or spend trillions on entanglements in the Middle East? That cheap oil has actually been quite expensive.

It is naive to believe we could be isolated from the global market of a fungible commodity.  Our presence there has helped stabilize and lower the oil price we pay.

[edpc]

It is naive to believe we could be isolated from the global market of a fungible commodity.  Our presence there has helped stabilize and lower the oil price we pay.

It’s even more naïve to believe the path between China and the US doesn’t mirror the one between the US and Japan, in the early 20th Century. It’s a similar contest over resources and regional hegemony. What saved us was our isolation and production capacity. We had better be prepared. Our current logistics make us vulnerable.

[Smokin Joe]

It isn’t a question of tree hugging, it’s a question of if you want a return to times when river fires were not unusual and expected, if you want to live in a development, built upon a toxic dump, or the days when we had modern China’s air quality. This type of industry has blowback. You can either have a cheap product, with real environmental consequences or a more expensive, cleaner process, with real economic consequences.


Cuyahoga River Fire

https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/63


Love Canal: A Brief History

https://www.geneseo.edu/history/love_canal_history


The pictures of bygone Pittsburgh and its residents choking under clouds of thick smog

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2155742/Hell-lid-taken-The-pictures-bygone-Pittsburgh-residents-choking-clouds-smog.html

No one wants to return to that mess. At the same time, we are in a situation where the only thing that makes the ecowhackos happy is that not one spade is turned, not one well drilled, not one resource mined. You want a return to cooking over dung fires (because you won't be allowed to burn trees), fine, but they'd probably protest that, too.

If you want National security in terms of resources, we have to mine our own. That means making a mess, digging a hole, drilling a well to extract those resources, and it means having the means to process the crude feedstocks and ores into the resources we need. There is no middle ground.

We are aware, more than ever, of the damage that can be done.
We have the technology to prevent a lot of that, now, some even to the profit of the enterprise refining the ore or other feedstock.
We have legal requirements for reclamation bonds and site cleanup.

This isn't 1960.

What IS happening, is that the environmentalist movement of today is obstructing even the cleanest development. That paradigm will not sustain our technological culture in the event we don't buy stuff from people who make far worse messes elsewhere, without any regard for the environment or those who live there, for the money we send them.

So play NIMBY or go Luddite, but our country will only be conquered by those who have the will to develop their resources, to their economic and military advantage.

[thackney]

It’s even more naïve to believe the path between China and the US doesn’t mirror the one between the US and Japan, in the early 20th Century. It’s a similar contest over resources and regional hegemony. What saved us was our isolation and production capacity. We had better be prepared. Our current logistics make us vulnerable.

In the case of an emergency, you can run off-spec crude oil through a refinery that was designed for heavier oil.  It will not be as efficient, and likely product output will be bottlenecked at a different product than before.

But it is not a case it must be 28.8° API gravity and not 28.9°.  And running a sweeter crude is far easier than running a crude too sour.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It’s even more naïve to believe the path between China and the US doesn’t mirror the one between the US and Japan, in the early 20th Century. It’s a similar contest over resources and regional hegemony. What saved us was our isolation and production capacity. We had better be prepared. Our current logistics make us vulnerable.

Energy access is not nearly as important in time of conflict as the ability to make war machinery.

Your focus here should be towards our domestic manufacturing sector instead as we can buy or steal hydrocarbons to use, but cannot ask other countries to manufacture our military equipment.

[edpc]

Energy access is not nearly as important in time of conflict as the ability to make war machinery.

Your focus here should be towards our domestic manufacturing sector instead as we can buy or steal hydrocarbons to use, but cannot ask other countries to manufacture our military equipment.

It’s both. When I said production capacity, I was referring (though not clearly) to critical wartime materials, such as oil, steel, aluminum, and REEs for use in domestic production. We could probably tailor existing facilities to manufacture necessary materials. We have done it before.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

It’s both. When I said production capacity, I was referring (though not clearly) to critical wartime materials, such as oil, steel, aluminum, and REEs for use in domestic production. We could probably tailor existing facilities to manufacture necessary materials. We have done it before.

Once again, those manufacturing facilities we tailored during WW2 now do not exist for the most part. 

To retain the abilities to make our military equipment is far more important than the access to hydrocarbons, which we have in abundance compared to those factories.

It is one reason that I reluctantly support the continued domestic auto industry.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Once again, those manufacturing facilities we tailored during WW2 now do not exist for the most part. 

To retain the abilities to make our military equipment is far more important than the access to hydrocarbons, which we have in abundance compared to those factories.

It is one reason that I reluctantly support the continued domestic auto industry.

In WW2, we could crank out a tank or a plane in what, something like a week?  If we get into a really hot war that requires us to use more than we already have, can we even get the first one off the assembly line before the conflict is over?  Certainly there would be advantages to starting the process of replenishing our arsenal ASAP, but I suspect we'll fight WW3 with the weapons we have on hand, very much unlike WW2.  And I also think tooling up the factories will be much less of an effort compared to the time it takes to do the actual manufacturing of our modern fighting tools.

[Smokin Joe]

In WW2, we could crank out a tank or a plane in what, something like a week?  If we get into a really hot war that requires us to use more than we already have, can we even get the first one off the assembly line before the conflict is over?  Certainly there would be advantages to starting the process of replenishing our arsenal ASAP, but I suspect we'll fight WW3 with the weapons we have on hand, very much unlike WW2.  And I also think tooling up the factories will be much less of an effort compared to the time it takes to do the actual manufacturing of our modern fighting tools.

That's one attitude:
Error 404 (Not Found)!!1

But in the event of a protracted conflict, it would be a good idea to make some replacement stuff....

[IsailedawayfromFR]

That didn't take long.  Seems the DOD had a plan 'B' already in hand.

Pentagon to counter China threats by funding U.S. rare earth mines

The U.S. Defense Department requested federal funding to support the ramp-up of several American rare earth element mines after China threatened an export ban.

The Sino-American Trade War raged this week with a series of back and forth retaliations. With China generally being unable to gain advantage by pressuring the Trump administration over the risks of higher import prices key component interruptions, Bloomberg reported that Beijing’s leadership has a plan to restrict export supply of the 17 so-called rare earth elements that are crucial to the U.S. production of military jet engines, satellites and lasers, plus consumer products from iPhones to electric cars.

The threat against the U.S. was issued Thursday in a China People’s Daily incendiary headline: “United States, don’t underestimate China’s ability to strike back.” The article warned that the United States’ “uncomfortable” dependence on China rare earths.

The Government Accountability Office in 2016 reported that the United States represents about 9 percent of world demand for rare earth elements, with the Defense Department accounting for 1 percent of demand. But 15 or the 17 elements are key inputs across most of America’s high-tech weapons systems.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/06/pentagon_to_counter_china_threats_by_funding_us_rare_earth_mines.html#ixzz5pbNVXOv5

[Smokin Joe]

That didn't take long.  Seems the DOD had a plan 'B' already in hand.

Pentagon to counter China threats by funding U.S. rare earth mines
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/06/pentagon_to_counter_china_threats_by_funding_us_rare_earth_mines.html#ixzz5pbNVXOv5

Of course. This is a weakness in our strategic supply lines that has been known for some time. What has been absent is the will to try to develop such resources during hostile administrations, subject to being undercut by Chinese suppliers at any time.

[catfish1957]

That didn't take long.  Seems the DOD had a plan 'B' already in hand.

Pentagon to counter China threats by funding U.S. rare earth mines
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/06/pentagon_to_counter_china_threats_by_funding_us_rare_earth_mines.html#ixzz5pbNVXOv5

Yep.   A Thank you to the Chicom bastards for helping jump start that new aspect of the US economy.

[Free Vulcan]

That didn't take long.  Seems the DOD had a plan 'B' already in hand.

Pentagon to counter China threats by funding U.S. rare earth mines
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/06/pentagon_to_counter_china_threats_by_funding_us_rare_earth_mines.html#ixzz5pbNVXOv5

It sounds like someone in DC was actually thinking ahead for once.

[Victoria33]

They could kneecap us pretty good if they followed thru.
I'm suprised they pulled this card. Can't always tell if they are scared or cocky, but the fact that they did is ominous.

@Free Vulcan
@mystery-ak 
@Cyber Liberty

Trump put a tariff on Chinese goods, thinking he can do anything he wants to any country.  He is not smart enough to consider what a country might do to him/us when he threatens their existence which he has done with China and has just put a tariff on Mexico, harming us again with higher prices for things we need from Mexico.  I heard a car here will now cost over $1,000 more due to doing this to Mexico.  Vegetables will be more expensive than they are now.

Trump's actions and rhetoric suggest he has a God Complex - well, he isn't God and countries are not falling down and worshiping him.  These countries are making plans to keep their country strong while Trump tries to destroy them.  Trump will be personally fine but this country, which is us, will have a lower standard of living.  He will go back to Trump Tower and tell the world he was the greatest President who ever lived.

How many countries used to be our friends and now they despise us due to Trump's manner and his dismissal of any country, any country leader as having worth.  Not only does he dismiss other countries as not having worth, he think this about any person in this country and that is you, me, any person.  Only he matters.

Back to China. They can substantially harm the US financially if they tire of Trump's tariffs harming them - harm is doubled sided which Trump has not recognized yet - he is still all him thinking he can do what he wants to the world.  If  the US was faced with bankruptcy due to China's actions to hurt Trump because he hurt them, Trump has gone bankrupt so many times, it means nothing to him, just as this country means nothing to him. Consider the rest in quotes except for ( ):

May 6, 2019
US Debt Owned by China
China's Large Position in U.S. Treasuries
The United States’ debt load has risen substantially since the start of the millennium raising concerns to some of the country’s long-term financial health. But who owns all of this debt? A nation’s debt consists of the total amount of bonds it has issued or sold. The U.S. debt sits at just over $21 trillion as of June 2018, and the largest investors in U.S. Treasuries are other governments and central banks.

China, which owned an estimated $1.18 trillion in U.S. Treasuries, is the number-one investor among foreign governments, according to the April 2018 figures released by the U.S. Treasury. This amounts to over 21 percent of the U.S. debt held overseas and about 7.2 percent of the United States’ total debt load. Learn more: After China, who are the largest investors in U.S. debt?

If China stops buying or elects to sell even a small portion of its position, U.S. Treasury prices would fall and yields would rise. The result of higher rates, in turn, would likely be slower economic growth and higher borrowing costs for the U.S. government.

(In September, 2012), with under two weeks to go until the United States would have to raise their debt limit or face the possibility of a default, China's Vice Foreign Minister, Zhu Guangyao, warned U.S. politicians that "the clock is ticking" and said, “We ask that the United States earnestly takes steps to resolve in a timely way the political issues around the debt ceiling and prevent a U.S. debt default to ensure the safety of Chinese investments in the United States.” This helps demonstrate that China may indeed try to influence the course of events in the United States when it feels a threat to its interests exists.
https://www.thebalance.com/how-much-u-s-debt-does-china-own-417016