“Rare earths aren’t actually rare, nor are they earths,” Julie Klinger told me. Julie is an associate professor at UW Madison and literally wrote the book on rare earth elements—Rare Earth Frontiers: From Terrestrial Subsoils to Lunar Landscapes.
I interviewed her last week, the day after Trump signed a rare earths deal with China, which had been threatening export restrictions. I knew from all the hubbub they were important for US national security and our supply chain, but I didn’t realize these elements seem to pop up in everything, including a ton of the materials used in precision machining.
*************
Listen on your favorite podcast app using pod.link.
View the podcast at the bottom of this post or on our YouTube Channel.
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/swarfcast
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/swarfcast/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/todays-machining-world
Twitter: https://twitter.com/tmwswarfblog
*************
Link to Graff-Pinkert’s Acquisitions and Sales promotion!
*************
Interview Highlights
China’s “Monopoly” Isn’t What You Think
Rare earths comprise 17 chemically similar elements on the periodic table. Julie calls them “spice metals.” You add a tiny bit to glass, steel, or other alloys and they do amazing stuff. They make things lighter, faster, stronger, brighter. They’re in your iPhone, your car, your welding electrodes. Lanthanum-thoriated tungsten electrodes? That’s a rare earth element giving you arc stability.
The conversation got really interesting when we talked about China’s dominance. I thought rare earths are like oil—a coveted resource that various nations hoard. But Julie explained that rare earths are actually all over the Earth’s crust. China doesn’t have a geological monopoly; they have a processing monopoly.
Back in the ‘80s and ’90s, Western firms basically said “this stuff is too dirty and expensive to process here” and outsourced it all to China. Now China controls about 80% of global processing, and we’re worried they’ll cut us off.
But Julie says that might actually be good for us in the long game. When China announced export restrictions, she said the Financial Times called it “a gift to Western industry.” Why? Because it drives prices up, making it economically viable for companies outside China to get back in the game.
We’re Not in a Rare Earth Crisis
Julie also shared how measured China’s approach actually is. They have business interests to protect too. Chinese companies and joint ventures want to keep selling. If China plays too much hardball, those businesses might just pack up and leave. It’s not the zero-sum game the news makes it out to be.
We don’t need to panic about rare earth supply chains. The materials keep flowing because everyone wants them to. Also, we likely already have a decent amount in reserve, we just don’t know exactly how much.
Any real restriction would actually accelerate innovation in substitutes and domestic processing, things we’ve already figured out but haven’t scaled because Chinese supply has been so reliable.
What I found really interesting that many people aren’t talking about is that technology is already moving beyond rare earths. Julie told me that scientists have been developing rare-earth-free batteries and magnets for years. The solutions exist. They’ve just been sitting on the shelf because it’s easier to keep buying from China. If that supply ever truly gets cut off, we’d see these alternatives deployed almost overnight. It could be like when we restricted AI chips to China. Instead of crippling them, it pushed them to develop their own technology faster and more cheaply.
Question: What materials in your shop do you worry about sourcing?
Podcast: Play in new window | Download


5 Comments
“Western firms basically said this (processing of r.e.) is too dirty & expensive”… Gimme break! American companies were hung out to dry with misguided free trade ideology that allowed China to subsidize and monopolize the whole industry while American firms were pushed to bankruptcy. You can change the subject industry in this article and copy/paste the same story over and over again.
Thank you for replying, DGM!
I’m sure a lot of factors led to the way things are now, and I’m sure we only know a fraction of the truth.
My guess is that the process is indeed dirty, but it’s very hypocritical because we do other dirty processes here like fracking among others. I don’t know if it’s apples to apples, but the decision to go there was indeed political.
My guess is that there were ways for us to figure out how to refine them cleanly, but people calculated for one reason or another to “let someone else do it.” Maybe it was for short term costs? Maybe it was deals to promote free trade that in retrospect were misguided. It’s BS to do it for environment because you are just letting someone else do dirty work. It’s likely some of everything. Maybe one was used to justify the other.
My hope is what Julie Klinger said, which is that the current standoff could mean the US becomes more independent of China. Like China becoming independent of us as far as Chips. For sure it was a clear miscalculation as far as national security.
One could argue making consumer goods abroad to reduce price.
That’s an issue that possibly COULD be justified, but this in retrospect was short term thinking done for political reasons.
I consider, that you commit an error. I can prove it. Write to me in PM, we will talk.
——
https://www.asionline.mx/group/grupo-programa-asi/discussion/31db8f59-37e8-4544-bd9f-bd34441fcada
This very valuable message
——
https://xsg.ru/internet/626-462636732877d0b73c505a1ef3d97c9c.html
In it something is. Earlier I thought differently, thanks for an explanation.
——
https://xtd.ru/spiski/263-i-vy-i-y-linux.html