Rare Earths: A Drop in the Bucket?
Japan and the U.S. are teaming up to mine rare earths near Minamitorishima, a small island in the Pacific. The stated goal? To cut reliance on China. Prime Minister Takaichi says the project, starting with demonstration tests in January, will extract mud from 6,000 meters down. Sounds ambitious, but will it actually move the needle?
Let's look at the scale. The surveys suggest "abundant mud rich in rare earths" around the island. Abundant compared to what? My initial thought is that this is a rounding error in global supply chains. The Prime Minister also said, "Securing various ways to procure rare earths is important for both Japan and the U.S." It's a truism, sure, but the real question is whether this particular way is economically viable and strategically significant.
The depth of 6,000 meters is the first red flag. Deep-sea mining is notoriously expensive and technically challenging. The cost of extraction alone will likely be astronomical. (Remember the Glomar Explorer? Probably not, but Google it). The article doesn't mention any specific tonnage estimates for the Minamitorishima deposits. That's a problem. A real analysis would include a cost-benefit breakdown, including extraction costs, processing costs, and the likely market price of the recovered rare earths. Without those numbers, we're just looking at wishful thinking.
It's also worth considering the processing side. Even if they manage to extract a decent amount of rare earth-rich mud, Japan and the U.S. still need the capacity to refine and process those materials. China currently dominates that part of the supply chain. Building new processing facilities is another massive capital expenditure. The article is silent on this point. I've looked at hundreds of these filings, and this particular omission makes me wonder what other inconvenient facts are being glossed over.
Strategic Diversification or Political Theater?
The motivation behind this venture is clear: reduce dependence on China. But the question is, how much dependence are we really talking about? China controls a huge percentage of the global rare earth supply. Even a successful project at Minamitorishima is unlikely to eliminate that dependence entirely. It might diversify the supply a bit, but at what cost? Is this about genuine strategic diversification, or is it partly political theater aimed at signaling resolve?
Frankly, I'm concerned about the lack of concrete details. The article mentions "concrete ways for Japan and the U.S. to cooperate." That phrasing is vague enough to drive a truck through. What specific technologies will they use? How will they share the costs and the extracted materials? What environmental safeguards will be in place? The absence of these details suggests that the project is still in the very early stages of planning.
Let's not forget the environmental angle. Deep-sea mining can have significant environmental impacts, disrupting ecosystems and potentially releasing harmful substances. The article doesn't mention any environmental impact assessments. Are they planning to address these concerns, or are they hoping no one will notice? And this is the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling - shouldn't environmental impact be the first thing mentioned?
