An Idaho mine will be the only US source of the key mineral antimony after 18 years of permitting:
The Chinese government in recent weeks expanded its ban on exports of a handful of minerals found in critical military and energy technologies in America. The move puts a spotlight on America's domestic mineral supplies, many of which are locked in years-long federal permitting and regulatory reviews.
One such case is a project located at an abandoned gold mine in the heart of Idaho. That mine contains some of the nation's largest known deposits of the rare mineral antimony, which is among those affected by China's export restrictions. But after a staggering 14 years, the federal government has yet to give the Idaho project a green light to begin production.
Perpetua Resources, the developer of the Stibnite gold mine in Valley County, Idaho, first initiated study, engineering, and community engagement on the project in 2010. Since then, it has faced mountains of permit filings and lengthy environmental reviews conducted by at least five separate federal agencies.
Experts and legislators say the federal regulatory and permitting behemoth with which developers like Perpetua must contend is both costly and detrimental to American national security. And they have pointed to the project as an example of why they say Congress must take up permitting reform legislation as soon as possible.
"China has weaponized the world's mineral supply chains," Rich Nolan, the president and CEO of the National Mining Association, told the Washington Free Beacon. "Again and again, Beijing has reached for the minerals lever to exert geopolitical leverage."
[...] Antimony, like the other minerals targeted by China, has significant defense and energy applications—it is a key component of munitions, night-vision goggles, and military uniforms and is required for both utility-scale and electric vehicle batteries.
The United States, though, imports 100 percent of its antimony supplies, 63 percent of which comes from China. China supplies the international market with about half of its antimony.
According to Perpetua, the Stibnite mine—which contains roughly 67,000 metric tons of antimony—could account for 35 percent of the nation's antimony demand in its first six years of production and fulfill long-term defense needs.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by khallow on Thursday December 19, @02:15AM (23 children)
Personally, I think any regulatory process that delays a legitimate activity for over a decade is something that needs serious reform. Perhaps we'll have a reason to thank China down the road?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @04:18AM (9 children)
Yeah.
Rather than jerking everyone around for so long, they should just outright refuse the permits because what they want to do can't be achieved without significant habitat destruction, abhorrent environmental pollution, and etc. Seen it all before, it's just not doable.
So just refuse them all, and stop requiring years of shit to keep them spinning.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 19, @04:45AM (8 children)
We see the consequences of such sentiments. This rewards countries that don't care about the environment because the minerals in question are needed whether or not they're mined locally.
Another thing to think about here. Perhaps the reason they jerked the mining company around in the first place was because they didn't have a valid reason (like your list above) to refuse the permits?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @06:48AM (5 children)
Indeed. So you're suggesting we go with the *other* sentiment -- permit "reform", i.e. deregulation, "one agency approved it and that's enough," (you don't like fish & wildlife _and_ marine _and_ agricultural agencies investigating effects? what, then? The guy down the street with a rubber stamp?) "fuck it, the company showed us the research, that's good enough," (companies providing their own evidence - FDA) "Why do they even need permits to do things on the land that _they_ own?!" (republican co-worker) "Well, then we'll *sell* them the state-owned land!" (next pres vs end of last presidency) "And if someone else already owns it, we'll just drive over everything and clear it because fuck it." (SpaceX / cards against humanity.)
Some time ago someone said that the workers on these projects are humans, and as such they don't want the environment harmed by these projects. Working at these companies, they'll do their best to ensure it doesn't happen and protect the environment. You just have to laugh at that sentiment: deep water horizon (ignoring the safeguards / following executive orders to skip them), the various gas and oil pipelines (massive spraying leaks that destroy the environment for miles around, permanently, etc), strip mining (omfg..). "Jus doin' mah job!" overrules whatever humanity they may have, every single time.
Maybe the US can leave mining to countries like Chile, Mexico, Brazil -- countries that care about the environment. More than the US, at least, especially if we enact "permitting reform". Stay tuned, any moment just about a month from now. As it is now, it's just a delay before everything happens anyway. At least now there's a delay -- in a month, full-(coal-fired-)steamshovels-ahead.
But hey yeah! Permit reform!! 'Cause too much gubmint, these companies need to be able to _do_ stuff!!
(Score: 4, Touché) by mhajicek on Thursday December 19, @03:22PM (3 children)
No one is saying what your strawman is saying. Mining in general cannot ever be done without environmental damage, so priorities must be set, and an "acceptable" amount of damage quantified. Then a system which can make that determination in a reasonable amount of time should be established.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @07:13PM (2 children)
different ac here:
nobody is disputing this. what is being requested, however, is an actual proper accounting of ***all*** the impact so 'acceptable' can actually be determined. we could generate jobs for a decade but end up with horrible medical costs accruing down the road. get that possibility out in the open and addressed and you'll probably find yourselves in agreement before long.
it's worth noting that this conversation is happening without anybody even clarifying why specific bans are in place. were you lot just planning on a rhetorical debate? strawman rasslin', perhaps?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by janrinok on Thursday December 19, @07:41PM (1 child)
I often agree with you, but in this case how do you know that the medical costs haven't yet been ascertained and declared. Unless you have more information than is being given in TFS your response is as unsubstantiated as the comment you are replying to. And if you have more then please share it.
It sounds to me as if the various federal agencies are taking it in turn to ask their questions when they could have all asked them at the beginning and have made a decision a long time ago. If a decision cannot be reached in 16 years then there is something wrong with the system. And what is being suggested is that the system should be reviewed and overhauled if necessary, which seems like a reasonable suggestion to me.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @08:01PM
i made no assertions substantial or otherwise. what i did do was ask for info on why the bans were in place, preferably with regard to the context of this conversation.
here is what i said: "get that possibility out in the open and addressed and you'll probably find yourselves in agreement before long." you and i are in agreement, i was saying the scope needed to be appropriate to make the assessment and you said the same thing. but... it has been brought up earlier in this thread that thinking about those questions is a 'consequence' because other countries are doing it, so it's not a universal feeling.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 20, @01:11AM
I see a kernel of truth in that sarcasm. One agency approves and that is enough.
Nobody says that mines can be done with zero impact. But we can make them low impact with a variety of mitigation technologies we already have. And sorry, I don't buy that a 16 year approval process that is still ongoing is a good faith effort to insure that mining is done with low impact.
I've seen this "war is peace" doubletalk before. Even the US is way above those countries in terms of care about the environment.
But worse, isn't "buy local" an environmental thing? It sounds a bit like you're fine with buying from across the globe if it means that something isn't built on the same continent as you.
(Score: 2) by Ox0000 on Friday December 20, @05:48PM (1 child)
You forgot one small clause in that sentence: "... that don't care about the environment in the long run/term because..."
It's not because _they_ want to go and destroy their own habitat and make it unlivable for the next N hears, that we should follow their lead and do the same.
Or perhaps what the mining company suggested was really, really bad for the environment and the regulator really wanted to give them an opportunity to demonstrate how they would do it without turning a particular ecosystem into a poisonous wasteland for the next half-century-or-more. So maybe it wasn't so much that they didn't have a valid reason, but that what the mining company (re-)demonstrated was just awfully bad...
(Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Sunday December 22, @06:37AM
On the other hand, environmental virtue signaling that hands power to the bad actors of the world is something that can threaten our own existence.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @07:02PM (10 children)
depends on why. if it's corruption, great, reform it. if it's because they have a good reason, like it's dangerous to the locals, then no reform is necessary.
do you know the actual reason those bans are in place? that'd be the starting place for your rebuttal.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Thursday December 19, @09:08PM (9 children)
That is not a good reason to delay a project. It may be a good reason to deny a project.
Most people aren't saying "approve everything", they are saying waffling for 14 years is too long. Make the damn decision so both sides can stop wasting time and resources on it.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @10:30PM (5 children)
it might be, we don't know. we're still not talking about what actually is going on, we're having a hypothetical discussion with incredibly vague details. maybe the delays have to do with something else that's moving. maybe the delays are because the right official hasn't been bribed yet. different contexts, different solutions.
we're not on opposing sides, here, im saying we're babbling before the requisite info is in front of us. for what it's worth i have zero problems at all with reviewing the process, especially if the goal is to increase transparency.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 20, @01:26AM (4 children)
Note the bad faith inherent in the process. There were three full resets and a partial reset over a 13 year period - despite the pipeline owner getting repeated approvals from all the regulators involved.
While I doubt it's happening, consider that China has means to make this process worse than it already is. They could plant agents in regulatory agencies who could slow things down legally through normal bureaucratic dysfunction. They could fund NIMBY and environmentalist groups to keep the would-be builder in court. They could indirectly fund politicians who block industrial projects.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20, @02:14AM (3 children)
keystone pipeline, really? why yes, i am ignoring stuff that happened in unrelated contexts, especially high-profile cases that span multiple states with numerous interests involved. as you pointed out american presidents got directly involved with that one. is there a reason we can't talk about the idaho mine specifically? i mean, the article does include a draft of the decision.
it's complicated.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 20, @03:21AM (2 children)
Wasn't unrelated hence why I brought it up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20, @04:09AM (1 child)
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 20, @08:06AM
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20, @12:31AM
Half the problem is: can you cite much of any denials having stuck?
It seems the only reason that corporations don't go through with things is because it takes too long.
Of course, clean-up is *always* built into the contract, and *surprisingly!*, _completely_ without any expectation, the mine hits the end of their vein and -- it was never profitable at all! It's completely bankrupt! Whoops, can't afford to pay anyone to clean up! Sorry, sue the company for contract violation, oops nothing there.
(Score: 3, Informative) by driverless on Friday December 20, @04:25AM (1 child)
You need to look at the backstory a bit, Perpetua Resources, which tries to paint itself as an Idaho-native environmentally-conscious company, used to be Midas Gold, a Canadian outfit who saw a get-rich-quick gold-mining opportunity in Idaho. They've been involved in an ongoing legal battle with Nez Pierce over pollution/contamination of their lands, and want to expand and pollute even more. Most of what they want to extract is gold and silver, the antimony is just a side-show to get attention.
So the headline is really "Canadian gold-mining outfit wants a permit to pollute native American lands, uses yellow-peril scaremongering to try and get it".
I'm sure Mr. Drill-baby-drill will be happy to give it to them when he takes office.
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Friday December 20, @08:53AM
I have close to zero knowledge of the proposal and whether it should be denied or allowed. My sole point was that if it should be denied, then deny it. Stop feeding the lawyers on both side with multi-decade lawsuits and delaying tactics.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @09:42PM (1 child)
These bans and regulations are methods of price supports on the commodities markets, where scarcity is most beneficial. Restricting competition and abundance is the real purpose.
(Score: 2) by Ox0000 on Friday December 20, @05:51PM
Got any evidence you want to share on this?
(Score: 5, Funny) by ikanreed on Thursday December 19, @04:07PM (1 child)
I'm promony. I don't get why all these mines are antimony.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday December 19, @04:34PM
I'm happy to get anymony.
But I don't mine for cryptomony.
Stop asking "How stupid can you be?" Some people apparently take it as a challenge.
(Score: 3, Touché) by looorg on Thursday December 19, @04:17PM (10 children)
I do wonder what would happen to China if the west just stopped, by sanction/taxes or other, importing all the cheap stuff? I'm sure it would not be great in the west either since the price of everything would skyrocket. But what would happen to them? After all what would all the millions upon millions of factory workers do that do nothing but make cheap stuff for the west? There isn't a sufficient market anywhere else.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by stormreaver on Thursday December 19, @06:02PM (5 children)
We would return to the economy we had before Tricky Dick started its inevitable destruction by normalizing trade with China dictator.
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Thursday December 19, @08:17PM (2 children)
Who is we? USA?
You have very low unemployment rate. So, who will be doing all this "manufacturing"? Who will be making plastic toys for kids?
The funny thing is, that Trump's tariffs will probably drive "the west" away from US and towards China. Then the US can make their own toothbrushes, contact lenses and milliard of other items you don't ever think about... like computer mice. Or cheap (or expensive) keyboards. Or LCD monitors. Or plastic plant pots. Stuff like that. Or those USB cables.
Shortages and inflation is what comes next.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by stormreaver on Thursday December 19, @09:30PM (1 child)
Most people in the USA are employed at shitty jobs with shitty pay. After we started outsourcing to China, we started losing the single-worker household. Such households then all but died with NAFTA. People may be employed, but not in any meaningful way. Those employment numbers are massaged in various ways to make them look way better than they actual are.
Having a job with a US toy maker used to be a good living before NAFTA (not China-related, but in the same vein). I suspect there are tons of people available to quit their slave-wage jobs for better opportunities that would arise after moving jobs out of China and Mexico and back into the US.
Of course prices would rise, but so would wages. Doubly so if the unemployment rate is accurate (though it isn't). The smaller the worker pool, the higher the wages. The biggest reason wages have not only failed to keep up with inflation, but have even declined over time, is because China and Mexico can undercut us due to poor working conditions there being the status-quo and a glut of workers with few other option.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday December 20, @10:08PM
Don't forget that they don't enforce environmental regulations or even the most basic OSHA and building codes stuff that we take for granted. It's not as simple as they have lower pay or their 401K isn't as good.
Making "bad stuff" illegal in the US and then allowing unrestricted infinite zero-tariff importing from other countries that allow it, is racist.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 19, @09:53PM (1 child)
We would return to the economy we had before Tricky Dick started its inevitable destruction by removing our currency from the gold standard and basing it on the petrodollar. Saudi Arabia is the elephant in the room.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20, @08:55AM
Less of an elephant, more of a warthog.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by gnuman on Thursday December 19, @08:09PM (3 children)
The question is *why*? Why would we want to do that?
The entire premise of the "bad chinese/china" is what? That some dictator wants china to control world trade? So what? Welcome back to 1980s and Japan buying the world -- didn't last long. China is in same boat. The population, while larger, is already starting to shrink. It's just next Japan in the making.
"competition" with China? for what? Africa? because there isn't much else you can compete with China on this planet.
So what is the point of this line of thinking in the first place? It's frankly a little short-sighted, IMHO. And what's the "win" in this case??
There are billions of other people that will buy cheap crap too. There'll soon be a bigger market for Xiomi than for Samsung (aka, South Korea) -- Xiomi sells to all middle income countries. So while it's true that profit market is lower, there's definitely a market.
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/insights/xiaomi-overtakes-apple-to-become-worlds-no-2-smartphone-brand-in-aug/ [counterpointresearch.com]
But also what would happen to the quality of life in the "west" if this happened? It's not just about cheap crap. It's about production efficiencies all the way along the supply chains. You want American factory making more roofing nails? Or frames for your photos? Or plastic pots? Where will you find the workers? And where will you find profits when you can only sell to other .. Americans? Welcome to inflation and shortages. And where are the benefits?
There's this idea that if US says something, "the west" will follow. That's already reaching its limits here. EU hasn't and isn't going to be imposing trade wars against China for one very simple reason -- we need China for cheap crap. There are major labour shortages everywhere so why would we want to protect "solar panel" industry here when China is willing to supply EU's needs at much lower cost. Solar panels also last for a generation so any issues with China can be fixed at a later point in time without a "crisis" situation. The same can be said for everything from roller skates to child toys. Competing on price on mass market produced item is ... not efficient.
Trade is something that benefits everyone. And China is *not* Soviet Union -- China exports more things world wide than they do to US. US better play their cards very carefully here. And I don't believe Trump can do that.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday December 20, @10:26PM (2 children)
Israel does not control China and they are NOT happy about that. They are MAD! Like the Ukraine thing, they'd rather the citizens be dead than not under control either directly or indirectly.
They said that about LEDs during the LED transition and look where we are now with disposable bulbs that don't last as long as old fashioned filament bulbs although they are much more toxic, less recyclable, catch fire more often, and cost 20x as much so everyone is happy except the consumer, of course. Mark my words, in a decade it'll be acceptable and conventional to have to replace solar panels every five years "because that's how it is, that's how it always was, and the good old days were a myth and you should just be happy about it because its green"
LOL all you need is land and robots dude. Oh and road/rail network, and electrical power. The days of the village blacksmith making nails has been over for awhile.
The most comical thing is I know a guy who did IT-type work at Senco and if you buy Senco nails for your nailgun (roofers, carpenter dudes, etc) "most of them" are ALREADY made in Ohio. enormous coils come in from the steelmill, boxed ready to use product comes out on pallets. They don't have many humans. They have a lot of forklift drivers who could be automated away if it made economic sense (probably doesn't). In between its all giant machines that probably look like a printing press to non-engineers. Literally unroll a giant coil at one end of the plant and like half a mile away at the other end stack boxes of completed product. I seen some pictures of cool stuff.
We are not running out of workers LOL. Less than a generation ago, the local shopping mall used to have a Sears, a Boston Store (Bonton to most, I guess) and a JCPenny. Oh and a Radio Shack. And down the road a CompUSA and a Circuit City and a Gateway computers store. That's just one commercial road one suburb to the east of me. And the whole country is like that. We will be fine LOL.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by weirsbaski on Saturday December 21, @07:51AM
This is an anecdote not data, but my experience doesn't back this up. LED bulbs may not last the 20 years they're supposedly rated for, but I'm definitely replacing bulbs less often now that I've transitioned to LED.
Does this account for the extra mercury,etc released for incandescents because they require considerably more electricity?
Wha? Are incandescent bulbs recyclable? And if so, what recycler accepted them?
I'm assuming you'll link to data that backs this claim up?
Using the first search-hits I got on Amazon: 6-pack of LED's: $2.39 per bulb. 20-pack of incandescents: $1.10 per bulb. Where's the 20x come in?
(Score: 2) by gnuman on Sunday December 22, @07:10PM
What does Israel have to do with China? Or anyone else? Or is this some kind of "Jew conspiracy thing" here you are peddling? And why are you bringing Ukraine in here?
Why do we have Ukraine war? Because of money and "miscalculations". Hindsight is 20/20: from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/22/ukraine-european-union-trade-russia [theguardian.com]
gives you the gist of why there's war in ukraine. Hint: it has nothing to do with Israel or US or Biden or most of the things you've heard about.
For nails, sure. Maybe that's a bad example. What about the other crap you see in Walmart? People need to operate robots. Handle product and input materials.
"As of November 2024, the unemployment rate in the US is approximately 4.2%. This figure represents the percentage of the labor force that is actively seeking work but is currently unemployed."
So again, where will you find your workers?
Let's look at the simple case of plumbers and electricians and even roofers. There are shortages everywhere for these people. I'm not even talking about US here. In Germany here, plumbers could be booked for months in advance. So where are you going to find workers? Can't seem to find them already. Even construction workers are few and far in between. Want to build a house? Plan a few years ahead to get workers.
Here in Germany, everyone wants to be "Project Manager" or similar. Where are the people doing actual work? Oh yes, not here. "Designed in California. Made in China". "Designed by Nokia in Sweden.. Made in China" or "Made in Poland" for half the major appliances in Germany.... And Germany has more than 2x manufacturing jobs to GDP compared to US. Yet, everywhere are signs for help wanted.
Saying nonsense like "robots will do it" is just BS. Robots will not be putting in a new toilet or wiring the garage for an electric car.
There's always going to be work that's needed to be done. If you can't import the products for cheap, someone locally will have to do that or you go without it. This means everything is more expensive and less is getting done. Then your standard of living goes down and you'll need to find another scapegoat for that then ;)
(Score: 2, Funny) by DadaDoofy on Thursday December 19, @07:41PM
In a month, needless regulatory impediments designed to cripple the US economically and militarily are going to get hit with a giant buzzsaw. It couldn't happen a moment too soon.
(Score: 1) by theshowmecanuck on Friday December 20, @07:49PM (1 child)
The documents for the Decision of Record for this project (Stibnite Gold Project for Perpetua Mines), are being uploaded today. It is on the US Forest Service site, and someone has already uploaded the supporting documents for the decision. And someone else archived the 'Draft' documents that gave permission predicated on the Decision of Record (after a 45 days waiting period), likely to give clear room to upload the final decision documents. Given the defence needs for this, even with the 50 or so further local permits required, it is unlikely this mine will be held up. Today's documents took 10 to 15 years to get to. The last one will take months if that.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Friday December 20, @09:54PM
Yeah I don't know about that. I know more about the oil business not metallic mining but I think this is it:
https://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=50516&exp=overview [usda.gov]
The claim is they've been working on permits for 18 years or 10 to 15 years or 14 years but I think it's actually 2 years.
I think, perhaps incorrectly from past knowledge of the oil biz (as an investor not an operator or any of that), that the NOI is a placeholder "we agree to start the process" then they do a mixture of research and nothing for five years (admittedly a legit complaint), then they post a DEIS NOA which is the software equivalent of an alpha 0.001 version of the decision, then two years later (literally 3 months ago) they posted the FEIS NOA which is like version 1.0 of the decision if you use software semantic versioning. They open for public comments for 1 month (going on three now, LOL) for the uneducated and uniformed unwashed masses whom usually don't know much of anything but they like to pretend there's public input to diffuse opposition to authority (kind of like how the US election system is also a scam), and they're finalizing the process right about now ish to publish the final verdict.
There could be appeals if the company doesn't like it, but it looks like they are going to approve it.
One thing I don't understand about the project, and don't care enough to research further although it is interesting, is its reported the Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho filed a lawsuit to stop the mine, but google maps seems to imply the mine is over 200 miles from their reservation. That would be like Harvard filing a lawsuit to forcibly stop the state of Maine from erecting a statue of Paul Bunyan; its far away and they have no obvious relationship with it at all so there is no obvious reason for them to complain. Which is probably why they've been unsuccessful at stopping it LOL. Obviously this mine isn't going to be an open pit 200+ miles in diameter although that would be pretty impressive if they pulled that off.
This mine is complicated legally in two ways. One is its federal land, life is a lot easier down south where the oil guys deal directly with cattle ranchers. The second is this "used to be" a major mining area and has some kind of national register of historic places designation which is not quite a park and not quite just empty wasteland so that is further hoop jumping. I guess its no longer a place of historic mining and will now be a place of current mining once again.
The oil biz is a mess but its still simpler than metallic. Metallic mining seems to be designed to be as complicated as possible for the sheer hell of it, so I can see why the company might be frustrated; although the government doesn't seem to be doing anything unusual in this specific case.