US Toll Free: +1 877 228 2034
Panama: +507 396 9011
Panama: +507 396 9011
Come and visit us at any of these upcoming shows
OCT 24-27: Investment Conference New Orleans - OCT 26-30: Plastic Surgery The meeting New Orleans - NOV 16-17: Hard Assets Investment Conference, San Francisco - APR 5-7, 2013: Global Currency Expo San Diego, Hilton Bayfront Hotel
Recent Posts
- Is Investing Offshore Legal and Ethical?
- The Pitfalls and Dangers of Investing in Silver
- The Value of Gold as a Hedge Against Inflation
- Why the Future of Precious Metals Look Bright
- What Are the Strategic Metals Offered by Swiss Metal Assets
- The Financial Crisis Began Five Years Ago
- China to Cut Rare Earth and Strategic Metal Production
Obama’s Rare-Earths Case With WTO Won’t Ensure Security: View
Published March 14, 2012 | By Swiss Metal Assets
">The Cold War had Americans worried about a “missile gap.” Should the rise of China have us nervous about a neodymium gap?
It’s a question President Barack Obama is taking seriously, as he showed Tuesday in asking the World Trade Organization to look into China’s manipulation of the global market in so-called rare-earth elements. We wish the U.S. Defense Department would show an equal amount of concern.
Neodymium is one of 17 rare-earth metals that have become vital to industrial production and national security in our high-tech age. Its unique magnetic properties are integral to computer hard drives, hybrid-car motors, aircraft turbines and those Beats by Dr. Dre headphones your teenager apparently can’t live without.
One thing neodymium isn’t is rare — it is as commonplace in the earth’s crust as prosaic metals like copper, and scattered around the globe. Much the same can be said of praseodymium (used in Hollywood’s arc lights), samarium (guided missiles) and lanthanum (night-vision goggles). Yet, despite this abundance, China produces more than 90 percent of the global supply of rare earths.
Mining Isn’t Easy
There are many reasons for this: The ore is usually found in small quantities that aren’t cost-effective to mine and refine. Because it is often in seams of thorium and other radioactive or harmful substances, extraction can create an environmental disaster. Opening a new mine in the U.S. can cost upward of $1 billion, and can take as long as 15 years before it becomes operational. These difficulties give an advantage to China, with its vast rare-earth deposits in Inner Mongolia and elsewhere, state-financed mining operations, and lax environmental and worker protections.
It’s never good to have a single supplier develop a market stranglehold, and the problem is compounded in this case because China is a commercial and military rival with no qualms about pressing every advantage. It places quotas on exports and sets prices for rare earths far lower for the domestic market — a ploy to get Western manufacturers to move factories inside China. According to a study by Bloomberg Government, the average Chinese export price of neodymium oxide was $321 per kilogram in the summer of 2011, 66 percent higher than the domestic price and a 563 percent increase compared with the same period in 2010.
The stakes go beyond commerce: In 2010, after Japan detained a Chinese fishing captain near some disputed offshore islands, Beijing played some power diplomacy by placing an embargo on rare-earth exports to its island neighbor.
In response, Japan has been shaping a national strategy on rare earths, centered on increasing stockpiles, recycling from discarded electronics and finding new sources (its scientists believe they may have found large deposits under the ocean). Yet the jury is out on Japan’s approach, and such steps may not lend themselves to the U.S.’s military-industrial structure. Congress is rightly leery of intervening in the market through creation of a large-scale defense stockpile, and most electronic devices contain too little rare-earth metal to make recycling financially worthwhile.
On new sources, however, things are looking up. Molycorp (MCP) of Greenwood Village, Colorado, has recently reopened its Mountain Pass mine in California’s Mojave Desert, which is particularly rich in so-called light rare earths such as lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium and neodymium. Mountain Pass was shut down more than a decade ago because of radioactive discharge. This time around, however, Molycorp seems to be saying and doing all the right things environmentally, and plans to be at full production later this year.
A Market Success
Congress had considered providing loan guarantees for Molycorp’s efforts to reopen Mountain Pass. In the end, the market worked just fine. The company raised nearly $400 million in an initial public offering last July and this month reached a $1.3 billion deal to purchase Canada’s Neo Material Technologies Inc. (NEM), a major refiner of rare earths. (Although this is mostly good news, Neo Material has two plants in China, raising the troubling possibility that ore from Mountain Pass could be exported there.) Meanwhile, the other major Western company in the field, Lynas Corp. of Australia, is running into local opposition in efforts to build a refinery in Malaysia.
Still, given the importance of rare earths to the U.S. economy and national defense, the government has a role to play in the success of Molycorp and its smaller domestic rivals.
The complaint to the WTO is justified, but is hardly certain to succeed. This is a tougher issue than a 2009 case on broader raw materials that China lost, as Beijing will probably cite concerns over the environmental impact of rare-earth mining as reason for restricting exports.
Better to concentrate on increasing non-Chinese supplies. Representative Mike Coffman, a Republican who represents the Colorado district where Molycorp is based, has been pressing the Pentagon for years for a report on its rare-earths strategy. Defense officials, who have blithely dismissed the idea of a rare-earth security threat in the past, are expected to give Congress a classified briefing on the issue this month.
At the very minimum, the Pentagon needs to have its Defense Logistics Agency conduct an inventory of rare earths on hand and its potential needs over the next five years, and develop a plan should Beijing officials jack up prices or turn off the supply. It could also look at long-term purchasing contracts with Molycorp, smaller U.S. companies and even foreign, non-Chinese firms like Lynas to assure diversity of supply. These minerals could eventually be sold off to military contractors and other manufacturers.
Thirty years ago, Deng Xiaoping presciently said: “There is oil in the Middle East, there is rare earth in China.” The U.S. has seen the ill-effects of dependence on Middle Eastern petroleum. We have a chance to avoid a similar fate with neodymium.
Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-13/obama-s-rare-earths-complaint-before-wto-won-t-ensure-u-s-security-view.html
Obama’s Budget: Dollars for Manufacturing Education, Rare Earths Research
Published February 15, 2012 | By Swiss Metal Assets
">Continuing with our look at President Obama’s budget proposal, a few Mineweb articles this week point out a few important line items regarding mining. But first, a look at something MetalMiner has spent some time reporting on: educating — and hiring — the next generation of American manufacturing workers.
Education in Trades
Obama is evidently continuing his push to get young workers interested in making the US competitive in terms of manufacturing, as he had been with his Skills for America’s Future initiative.
“As part of his short-term stimulus efforts, Obama today announced an $8 billion Community College to Career Fund proposal that would link businesses and community colleges to train as many as 2 million workers for jobs in high-growth, high demand industries,” Bloomberg reported yesterday. This is on top of the $2 billion in competitive funds Obama pledged in 2010 to community colleges over four years, according to a November 2010 White House press release.
The departments of Education and Labor would tag-team this effort, the canopy of which includes health care, advanced manufacturing, transportation, clean energy and information technology, according to an official statement as reported by Bloomberg.
The question becomes, with more than $10 billion sunken into this endeavor, what will the ROI be? And at what rates are companies hiring these types of grads for worthwhile positions?
There are signs that, to some degree, the plan is working. One good example is in San Diego, where Solar Turbines accepts (and has been for 30 years) apprentices who work at the company while getting certification at San Diego City College, according to a KPBS article. Also, Southwestern Community College partners with Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility to train shipyard workers.
However, state budget cuts may prove a roadblock to Obama’s hopes down the line: California cut funding for apprenticeship programs at community colleges two years ago by 51 percent, according to KPBS.
Mining Safety, Mining Royalties and Rare Earths Research
Back to how the budget proposes to affect domestic metals and mining directly. A Mineweb article claims, “approvals of mine ventilation and roof plans face more delays” in the proposed 2013 Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) budget, which is proposed to be cut by $1 million from last year.
Granted, most of this proposal deals with coal mines and coal-mine safety, but at least some jobs in the mining sector will be retained: the article states that the “budget maintains the 597 fulltime positions currently in the metal and nonmetal mine safety and health division,” and “requests an increase of $1,834,000 to fully fund enforcement staff positions.”
A separate Mineweb article details Obama’s “calls for a 5% gross mining royalty on federal lands, and a hardrock abandoned mined land fee on all private and public lands.” Obama proposed the same last year, only to be shot down by Congress. The administration says the royalties will yield $74.5 million in revenue over the next decade, and “would be instituted under a leasing program under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 for certain hardrock minerals, such as silver, gold and copper.”
Lastly, the proposed budget for the United States Geological Survey (USGS) has been upped $34.5 million from last year, including an increase of $1 million to support research on rare earth elements.
By: Taras Berezowsky
Source: http://agmetalminer.com/2012/02/15/obamas-budget-dollars-manufacturing-education-rare-earths-research/
Posted in Interesting Articles | Tagged MetalMiner, Metals, mining, Obama, Rare Earth, rare earth elements, rare earth metals, Solar Turbines
"/>
A quick search of media stories from the month of December, 2009 shows 24 clips including references to the 15 lanthanides and their related elements scandium and yttrium. By contrast, one day in December, 2011 produced 56 stories on the same resources. Even the tone of REE coverage has transformed over the years. Two years ago, an analyst piece from veteran metals consultant Jack Lifton titled “Underpriced Rare Earth Metals from China Have Created a Supply Crisis ” was a common headline as the world discovered that cheap supplies had left manufacturers vulnerable to a monopoly with an agenda. That supply fear made REE the investment de jour and sent almost all of the rare earth prices through the roof. In December of 2010, the headlines in big outlets like The Motley Fool announced that the “Spot Price of Rare Earth Elements Soar as much as 750% since Jan. 2010.”
Reality soon set in as investors realized that this was not a simple supply and demand industry. First, demand was still vague, subject to change and very specific about the type and purity of the product being delivered. Second, the ramp-up period for companies exploring, getting approval for development, mining, processing efficiently and delivering to an end-user was very, very long. Some became discouraged. That is why this year, the consumer finance site, The Daily Markets ran an article with the headline: “Why You Shouldn’t Give Up on the Rare Earth Element Minerals” by Gold Stock Trades Newsletter Writer Jeb Handwerger.
Through it all, Streetwise Reports has focused on cutting through the hype to explain what is really driving demand, how the economy and geopolitics shape supplies going forward and which few of the hundreds of companies adding REE to their company descriptions actually had a chance of making a profit.
Back in June of 2009, in an interview titled “The Race to Rare Earths,” we ran an interview with Kaiser Research Online Editor John Kaiser that concluded “China’s export-based economy, once dependent on American greed, is now but a fading memory. While the U.S. was busy printing and preening, the Chinese were long-range planning. But America wasn’t the only country caught off guard by China’s strategic, if surreptitious, supply procurement.” Even while other analysts were panicking, Kaiser was pointing out how investors could be part of the solution–and make a profit in the process.
“For the juniors, the opportunity right now is to source these projects. They get title to them, and when these end users want to develop them, they’re going to have to pay a premium to have these projects developed,” Kaiser said. “So it will not be economic logic that results in these companies getting bought out and having their deposits developed. It’ll be a strategic logic linked to long-term security-of-supply and redundancy concerns. And we’re seeing that sort of psychology at work in this market. It’s a bit of a niche in this market. Not as big as gold, but it is an interesting one because of the long-term real economy link implications.”
After years of covering the space by interviewing the growing chorus of analysts and newsletter writers singing the praises of rare earth elements, in June of 2011, we launched The Critical Metals Report to give exclusive coverage to the entire space, including rare earth elements, strategic metals and specialty metals. One of the first experts interviewed was Emerging Trends Report Managing Editor Richard Karn in an article called “50 Specialty Metals under Supply Threat.” He warned that investing in the space is not as simple as some other mining operations. “The market is just starting to become aware of the difficulty involved with processing these metals, which, in many cases, more closely resemble sophisticated industrial chemistry than traditional onsite brute processing. Putting flow sheets together that process these metals and elements economically is no mean feat.”
In this early article, Karn busted the myth that manufacturers would find substitutions, engineer out or use recycled supplies for hard-to-access materials. “The advances we have seen especially in consumer electronics over the last decade and a half have not been driven by lone inventors or college kids tinkering in their parents’ garages, but rather by very large, well-equipped and well-staffed research arms of powerful corporations. The stakes are high and if a certain metal is critical in an application, they will buy it regardless of the price,” he said.
Similarly, a July 2011 article for The Critical Metals Report featured Energy and Scarcity Editor Byron King sharing “The Real REE Demand Opportunity” driven by the automobile industry and beyond. He was one of the first to point out that not all rare earths are the same with Heavy Rare Earth Elements demanding big premiums.
“Going forward, the serious money will be in HREEs, which have a lot of uses other than EVs,” King said. “For example, yttrium is used in high-temperature refractory products. There’s no substitute for yttrium. Without it, you can’t make the refractory molds needed to make jet-engine turbine blades. If you can’t make jet-engine turbine blades, you don’t have jet engines or power turbines. The price points for these HREEs will reflect true scarcity and unalterable demand. People will bite the bullet and pay what they have to in order to get the yttrium.”
House Mountain Partners Founder Chris Berry also addressed the impact of electric vehicle demand on vanadium, a popular steel alloy strengthener now being used in lithium-ion batteries in the interview “Can Electric Vehicles Drive Vanadium Demand? “
“The use of vanadium in LIBs for EVs is not significant yet, but could eventually become important as the transportation sector electrifies. One of the real challenges surrounding LIBs is settling on the most effective battery chemistry. In other words, what battery chemistry allows for the greatest number of charge recycles, depletes its charge the slowest and allows us to recharge the fastest? Today, based on my research, lithium-vanadium-phosphate batteries appear to offer the highest charge and the fastest recharge cycle. It seems that the lithium-vanadium-phosphate battery holds a great deal of promise, offering a blend of substantial power and reliability. I am watching for advances in battery chemistry here with great interest,” Berry said.
In September, Technology Metals Research Founding Principal Jack Lifton shared his insights on why some junior REE companies are prospering while others wither and die. In the article, “Profit from Really Critical Rare Earth Elements,” he said: “Rare earth junior miners are now being culled by their inability to raise enough capital to carry their projects forward to a place where either the product produced directly or the value to be gained from the company’s development to that point by a buyer can be more profitable than a less risky investment. The majority of the rare earth junior miners do not understand the supply chain through which the critical rare earth metals become industrial or consumer products. Additionally, they do not seem to recognize the value chain issue, which can be stated as ‘How far downstream in the supply chain do I need to take my rare earths in order to be able to sell them at a profit?’”
Then Lifton made this important point for Critical Metals Report readers. “It is very important for the small investor to understand that the share market does not directly benefit the listed company unless the company either sells more of its ownership or pledges future production for present, almost always sharply discounted, revenue.” As always, Lifton encouraged investors to follow the money to a specific end rather than the general market demand often envisioned by investors accustomed to the more defined gold market.
In October, JF Zhang Associates’ Principal Consultant and Chief China Strategist J. Peter Zhang shared his insights on “U.S. Manganese Supply as a Strategic Necessity.”
Manganese is now largely used largely in the production of low quality stainless steel, but is being incorporated into lithium-ion batteries. That increased demand is focusing attention on the limited supply outside China. “There really is no electrolytic manganese metals production in the U.S. or anywhere outside China except for a small percentage from South Africa. We don’t produce even a single ounce in North America. Relying on other countries to supply essential commodities (like oil for instance) is always a problem. If China suddenly decided to reduce production, or in the likely event that its domestic demand increases, the world would be out of options. Policymakers need to understand this risk and Congress needs to take action to minimize the potential impacts,” he said. “From the end of 2008 to 2009, China tied things up. Since then, the price has doubled, tripled and quadrupled. That should be a wakeup call. North America needs to either establish a strategic reserve system for critical metals or build production capacity to mitigate supply risk. I think there is some sense of urgency right now, but a lot more needs to be done.”
Picking the right junior is the trick. In the November article “Navigating the Rare Earth Metals Landscape” Technology Metals Research Founding Principal Gareth Hatch outlined the odds. “TMR is tracking well over 390 different rare earth projects at present; I can’t see more than 8-10 coming onstream in the next 5-7 years. Projects already well past exploration and into the development and engineering stage, and beyond, clearly have first-mover advantage.”
Just this month, in an interview entitled, “The Age of Rare Earth Metals” Jacob Securities Analyst Luisa Moreno compared the impact REEs will have on our daily lives with the transformation in the Bronze Age.
“There is an economic war over the rare earths, with China on one side and other industrialized nations on the other—Japan, the United States and the E.U. China is probably winning. It has decreased exports in the last few years and increased protection. It has attracted a great deal of the downstream business and it is positioning itself well. At this point, it produces most of the world’s rare earths, and prices are at record highs. Japan and the other countries have been left with few options, and those options are more expensive, such as substitution, recycling and adapting production lines to use less efficient materials.” Moreno then pointed to the seven companies that could come to the world’s rescue and usher in a miraculous new world of smaller, stronger, more powerful gadgets based on a steady supply of REE materials from reliable sources.
By: The Gold Report
Source: http://jutiagroup.com/20111227-critical-reading-for-rare-earth-metals-investors/
Posted in Interesting Articles | Tagged 50 Speciality Metals under Supply Threat, Byron King, commodities, Critical Rare Earth Elements, Economic War, Garth Hatch, gold, Gold Stock, Gold Stock Trade, Heavy Rare Earth Elements, HREEs, investors, J. Peter Zhang, Jack Lifton, Jeb Handwerger, Lithium-Ion, Luisa Moreno, Manganese, mining, Race to Rare Earths, Rare Earth, Rare Earth Element, Rare Earth Element Minerals, rare earth metals, Rare Earth Prices, REE, REEs, Scandium, Supply Crisis, Technology Metals Research, The Age of Rare Earth Metals, The Critical Metals Report, The Real REE Demand Opportunity, U.S. Manganese Supply, Underpriced, Vanadium, Yttrium
"/>
Exchange-traded funds are jumping on the bandwagon to invest in rare earths and other strategic metals, mainly by investing in companies that mine and use the materials. There are risks for ETF investors to weigh.
Oil, Gold…Rare Earths?
As ETFs focus on some less-known materials, there are risks to weigh
The raw-materials rally that has driven investors to load up on gold, crude and wheat is also sparking interest in funds tied to relatively obscure commodities such as lithium, uranium and rare earths.
Investors have poured hundreds of millions of dollars into a handful of exchange-traded funds linked to those materials over the past year or so. But betting on these kinds of industrial building blocks presents some unusual challenges and risks.
Trying to replicate the price swings in underlying materials through an ETF is challenging because there are typically no futures markets for these substances, as there are for more commonplace materials. Holding the physical goods is often impractical as well. As a result, many funds instead concentrate rare-earth and other exotic-metals plays on related stocks, which can rise or fall independently of the commodities.
The fortunes of some of these materials—and the companies that work with them—can change suddenly. After Japan’s nuclear disaster in March, two ETFs that hold uranium-related stocks plunged amid a clouded outlook for nuclear energy and haven’t recovered to date. In addition, uncertainty about the global economy has caused prices of some rare earths to fall by double-digits in percentage terms in recent months, according to market participants.
Investors who accept the risks are generally buying into a thesis that’s been applied to a broad range of commodities in recent years—that rapid economic growth in emerging markets is pushing up demand and suppliers are struggling to keep up. Indeed, some basic commodities have leaped in price, but some of the biggest increases are related to lesser-known materials.
While oil costs a little more than twice what it did at the low point in 2009, for instance, the price of neodymium—one of a group of rare-earth elements used in high-tech products and advanced weaponry—was recently up 23-fold over a similar period, according to American Elements, a Los Angeles manufacturer that uses rare earths.
A Step Removed
Van Eck Global last year launched Market Vectors Rare Earth/Strategic Metals. What qualifies as a “strategic” metal is “a little subjective,” says marketing director Edward Lopez. But instead of buying the metals, the fund buys shares in companies that get at least half their revenues—or have that potential—from rare earths or materials such as titanium and tungsten.
Despite their name, rare earths are common in the Earth’s crust. But about 90% of rare-earth supplies currently comes from China, which has started to limit exports, saying it needs the materials at home. Likewise, foreign investors face restrictions on holding shares of major Chinese rare-earth producers, Mr. Lopez says.
Mining companies in the U.S. and elsewhere are trying to ramp up production to replace lost supplies. Investing in such companies carries distinct risks, Mr. Lopez says, including the hurdles of moving from planning to production and the possibility that the market for the materials may shift in the meantime. But the Van Eck fund includes among its top holdings Molycorp Inc., in Greenwood Village, Colo., and Australia-based Lynas Corp., companies that are developing rare-earth mines in the U.S. and Australia, respectively.
Shares of the Van Eck fund are down 21% since it was launched last October, and down 36% this year through Sept. 30. The fund at the end of August had $346 million in assets, according to National Stock Exchange, a data provider and stock exchange.
Liking Lithium
Lithium is another metal that has attracted widespread interest, because of the vital role it plays in powering a proliferating array of consumer electronics, including cellphones and laptops. But, as with other such elements, it’s impractical to invest in lithium directly. It’s an often volatile material and insuring a large stock could “take so much away from the return that it wouldn’t be practical,” says Bruno del Ama, chief executive of Global X, an ETF provider.
The company’s Global X Lithium, launched in July 2010, invests in shares of companies that mine lithium and in makers of products that use lithium, such as lithium-ion batteries.
The fund’s largest single holding is Sociedad Quimica & Minera de Chile SA, a Chilean company that produces plant nutrients and iodine as well as lithium. Shares in the company made up 23% of the fund’s holdings as of Sept. 30.
The fund had $128 million in assets at the end of August, including inflows this year of $24 million, according to National Stock Exchange.
Mr. del Ama says buying stocks can give investors a boost because miners can make money even if prices for the material stay flat. “If on top of that, the price of the commodity goes up…you get a leveraged impact on the return,” he says.
Shares in the lithium fund have fallen 16.2% since the 2010 launch, and are down 41% this year through Sept. 30. Average lithium prices in 2011 through July were 2% below average prices last year, according to TRU Group Inc., a consultancy that specializes in lithium.
Uranium Plays
The recent fate of two uranium-linked funds—Global X Uranium and Market Vectors Uranium+Nuclear Energy—shows that the “leveraged play works both ways,” as Mr. del Ama puts it.
After the March 11 earthquake and tsunami in Japan crippled the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, uranium prices plunged amid concern the incident would undercut support for nuclear power. In early September, weekly prices for the thinly traded fuel were 23% lower than they were on March 7, before the disaster, according to Ux Consulting Co. LLC.
But shares in Global X’s uranium fund, which focuses on uranium mining, have fallen even harder, losing more than half their value since March 10, the day before the Japanese disaster. The Market Vectors fund, which invests in both miners and other firms that work on nuclear energy, has fared somewhat better over that same period, falling 33% through Sept. 30.
By LIAM PLEVEN
Mr. Pleven is a reporter for The Wall Street Journal in New York. Email him at [email protected]
