Reference News Network, January 12 report: On January 7, the U.S. Consumer News and Business Channel website published an article by Yingshan Li (translated name) titled "Experts Warn That Trump's 'Absurd' Bet on Rare Earths in Greenland Faces Reality Check." The following is a compilation:
Industry experts say that Washington's push to develop rare earths in Greenland is "absurd," due to factors including low ore grades, harsh weather, and the reality that the materials extracted would still need to be processed in China.
President Donald Trump said he was considering "a range of options" to obtain Greenland, including "using the U.S. military."
Greenland lies between the United States and Russia, and has long been seen as strategically important, especially for Arctic security. This territory is near emerging Arctic shipping routes. Due to melting ice caps, new routes are being opened near Greenland. These routes could significantly shorten transportation times between Asia and Europe compared to the Suez Canal.
Regarding Trump's interest in Greenland, Michael Walden, who was about to become the President's National Security Advisor, was clear. Walden said in an interview with Fox News a year ago, "It's about critical minerals and natural resources."
Matan Somasundaram, founder and CEO of Deep Data Analytics, also said that if the U.S. gained control, the market would believe mining permits would follow, creating short-term optimism.
However, experts point out that this optimism ignores fundamental bottlenecks in rare earth mining and processing. Somasundaram said, "The reality is, it's hard to do because of the weather, and it's not cost-effective. Even if you extract it, you have to send it to China for processing... In the long term, there's almost no change."
Harsh climate, remote location, and limited infrastructure in Greenland are seen as major obstacles to realizing its strategic value.
The core concern of skeptics is the quality of the ore. Although Greenland has large quantities of rare earth-bearing rocks, the rare earth content is far lower than that of existing deposits in other regions. Additionally, although some projects in Greenland are large in scale, they have low levels of heavy rare earths, such as dysprosium, terbium, and yttrium, which are more strategically valuable.
Professor John Mavrogenes of the Australian National University's School of Economics said, "Although these rare earth-bearing rocks are numerous, their grade is very low." He said that in the main mines currently producing rare earths around the world, including those in the United States, China, and Australia, rare earths typically make up 5% to 10% of the ore, or even more. In Greenland, this number is less than 1%.
Low grades significantly increase costs.
Mavrogenes said, "With such a low grade, you have to move a lot of rock. Imagine comparing a 1% rare earth content with a 10% rare earth content. This means that in a place without infrastructure, no ready equipment, and no labor force, you would have to move ten times as much rock as elsewhere."
Even under optimistic assumptions, it would take years for Greenland to achieve mining. He said, "They will need at least ten years before they can carry out any substantial work. So, the idea that these projects can succeed in the short term is absurd."
Jon Hickev, president and director of Storm Crow Capital, said that if Washington wanted supply, it already had it. According to data from the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. has an estimated 19 million tons of rare earth reserves, while Greenland has an estimated 15 million tons. Hickev said, "If the U.S. wants rare earths, they can completely mine them on their own territory." (Translated by Qing Songzhu)
Greenland street view (Xinhua News Agency)
Original source: toutiao.com/article/7594472117706539563/
Disclaimer: This article represents the views of the author.