Rare Truth
I start today with a bit of mineralogical history. The Washington Monument on the National Mall was built both before and after the Civil War, and was finally finished in 1884. At the top of America's obelisk sits a pyramid, with observation windows visitors can look out of. The very tippy-top of this stone pyramid (roughly 555 feet above ground -- at the time, the tallest building in the world) was capped with a small pyramid made out of metal (which doubles as the contact point for the monument's lightning rod). The metal used was one of the rarest available at the time -- so rare that it was as expensive as silver. This small pyramid weighs 100 ounces, and at the time was the largest cast piece of this metal in the world. So what was this extremely rare metal?
The answer is not what you'd think it would be. In fact, the answer is pretty laughable now because of the widespread use of the metal today. But in the 1880s, America honored its first president with a cap of pure... aluminum.
My point being, rarity is a fluid concept, when it comes to minerals. Aluminum is pretty widely abundant now, but back then the refining techniques to separate pure aluminum from raw ore were in their infancy. Aluminum didn't become cheap and plentiful until new refining techniques made it a whole lot easier to produce -- which ironically happened only two years after the Washington Monument was completed.
This is all a very roundabout way of addressing a bugaboo I currently have with much of the mainstream media. Journalists who cover science and scientific stories have become rare themselves these days -- even though they used to be quite common (perhaps not as common as aluminum cans, though). So a representation by our current president which is just completely wrong is being allowed to stand mostly unchallenged, which I think is a shame.
Here's the basic misunderstanding, in a nutshell, from a Washington Post story that is (so far) the only one I've seen directly debunking this error (which it does at length):
The elements reportedly included in the proposed U.S. mineral deal differed from those referenced by [President Donald] Trump earlier this month, when he sparked confusion by expressing interest in Ukraine's "rare earth" minerals. "We're looking to do a deal with Ukraine, where they're going to secure what we're giving them with their rare earth and other things," Trump said.
However, Ukraine does not possess noteworthy quantities of "rare earths," an official category of 17 elements used as high-tech magnets to power cellphones, electric vehicle batteries and certain defense systems.
In other words, not only did Trump get it wrong (assumably mixing up the concept of "rare minerals" with "rare earth minerals," but since he obviously just learned the term, he also used it incorrectly (the phrase is either an adjective used to describe "rare earth elements" or "rare earth minerals," or when used as a noun is almost always plural, as the next paragraph in the article demonstrates).
So here are the basic facts. The rare minerals in Ukraine that Trump wants handed over to the United States are: kaolin, gallium, manganese, germanium, lithium, graphite, titanium, beryllium, uranium, and also (perhaps) gold. The lithium, graphite, and uranium deposits are the ones that Trump is most interested in (at least, that's what can be gleaned from the reporting on the proposed deal -- the actual list of what he's asking for has not been made public).
None of those minerals are rare earth minerals. Here is a complete list of the 17 elements that are included in the "rare earth" designation, with their atomic numbers:
21 -- Scandium
39 -- Yttrium
57 -- Lanthanum
58 -- Cerium
59 -- Praseodymium
60 -- Neodymium
61 -- Promethium
62 -- Samarium
63 -- Europium
64 -- Gadolinium
65 -- Terbium
66 -- Dysprosium
67 -- Holmium
68 -- Erbium
69 -- Thulium
70 -- Ytterbium
71 -- Lutetium
Most are pretty unfamiliar to those of us who haven't recently memorized the periodic chart. Four of them (yttrium, terbium, erbium, and ytterbium) are derived from the name of the town (Ytterby) in Sweden where they were first discovered. Four others also honor this geography: scandium (Scandinavia), europium (Europe), holmium (Stockholm), and thulium (the land of "Thule" in Norse mythology). Some are hard to even easily pronounce (praseodymium?). And, much like aluminum used to be, the classification is a misnomer itself -- most of the rare earths aren't actually all that rare. The problem is that refining each one individually is still very hard to do, as they tend to be found mixed up together in ore deposits and require extensive processing to purify. Perhaps, as with aluminum, some future advancement in this processing will make the rare earths cheaper and more commonly used, but even so I seriously doubt we're going to start using "dysprosium foil" in our kitchens any time soon.
But let's get back to the media's failings. Ukraine does not have significant deposits of rare earth minerals. It just doesn't. Some in the print media have figured this out -- the Washington Post now only seems to be using the term in direct quotes from Trump, and the New York Times is using "rare minerals" instead. But for the most part the television media hasn't realized the error yet, so I continue to hear story after story taking Trump at face value (always a risky thing to do), reporting on the "rare earths" or "rare earth minerals" in Ukraine... that do not actually exist.
This is not the most important thing happening in politics or the media right now, I do realize. So my apologies for writing an entire article about it, but it sets my teeth on edge every time I hear it (hey, I warned you it was just "a bugaboo I currently have"). Perhaps they're all worried that if they directly challenge the White House on Trump's use of the term, he'll try to unilaterally redefine "rare earth" as "whatever Donald Trump says is a rare earth." That development wouldn't surprise me in the least, to put it mildly. At least he can't rename them all "americium," since that one's already taken (atomic number 95).
Snark aside, though, journalism is supposed to deal with facts. It is supposed to point out errors made by political leaders. Perhaps I am being naive to still expect that in today's media and political universe, but to me facts still matter (especially scientific facts).
So, quick refresher course: "rare" does not equate to "rare earth." Trump's negotiators are demanding half of Ukraine's mineral wealth, which includes many rare minerals. But none of them -- that's "none," as in "not a single one" -- are rare earth minerals. Anyone in the media who tells you different is either just ignorant or too scared to contradict Trump even when he's flat-out wrong. I would tell them all: "Run it by your science editors," but sadly it seems that science editors are now even rarer than some of the minerals being discussed.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Thanks very much for this.
I admit I've been buying into the mainstream story that you try to clear up here: that Ukraine has workable deposits of 'rare earths' that are central to the ongoing electrification of the US and world economies. The commentary has emphasized two things, from what I remember:
1) The 'rare earths' are not actually all that rare, but they are hard to refine to usable qualities - as you report. But more importantly, if I understand the problem, it isn't that they're just "hard to refine" it's that they're "hard to refine without seriously damaging the local environment where the refining takes place." Toxic waste dumps to the 10th power, all local water sources incurably polluted, etc., or something like that. And so ... and so ... although California and other western states have plenty of this resource, we have always preferred to let China do the dirty work.
But with China no longer a friendly supplier in a geopolitical sense, why not let Ukraine do the dirty work? Or, since the deposits are in the eastern part of Ukraine, why not give the territory to Russia and let Russia do the dirty work? And we just buy the refined ores from them per the ongoing agreements.
2) Trump couldn't care less about this issue, because he doesn't understand it - as you note. But Elon Musk runs an electric car company, and presumably knows a thing or two about the uses of rare earth minerals in building electric car and battery technology. This sudden U.S. interest in Ukraine's mineral resources, whether under Ukrainian or Russian control, would seem to come from Musk's knowledge and interests, and private benefit, than from some larger U.S. foreign policy about furthering technologies that may ameliorate climate change, at whatever cost to the ecology of the Donbas region in western Asia/eastern Europe.
And finally - although I love your curious list of the technical 'rare earths' in contrast to the named minerals that have been reported which aren't technically rare earths - I notice that "lithium" is on the fake list, and you note that even Trump seems to know that lithium is central to the manufacture of what are known as lithium batteries.
So are there two stories here? Is the rare earth/non-rare earth distinction a slightly fake one? Ukraine has minerals of both categories, and in both cases has the new administration decided that obtaining access to those resources should drive our negotiations to sell Ukraine and its Western-oriented democracy down the river, if Putin makes a better offer on that access?
for a guide to the pronunciation of rare earths and other elements, consult Tom Lehrer
So what was this extremely rare metal?
Unobtanium?
But in the 1880s, America honored its first president with a cap of pure... aluminum.
Aluminium!
Element symbol Al, atomic number 13. In modern-day America, its primary political usage is in the production of MAGA tin foil hats, which by the way are made from aluminium foil and not tin. :)
nypoet22
2
for a guide to the pronunciation of rare earths and other elements, consult Tom Lehrer
Love that elements song, thank you!
It's like singing the alphabet for science nerds.
Here's the lyrics version for beginners.
*singing*
I am the very model of a modern Major-General
I've information vegetable, animal, and mineral
I know the kings of England, and I quote the fights historical
From Marathon to Waterloo, in order categorical
I'm very well acquainted, too, with matters mathematical
I understand equations, both the simple and quadratical
About binomial theorem I am teeming with a lot o' news
With many cheerful facts about the square of the hypotenuse
___________________________
And now I got the song from Pirates of Penzance running through my head and won't stop.
This is on you, poet! ;)
Kick [4]
LOVE that! Thanks so much.
And yes, the original Major-General's song - a parody of the course at the Royal school for officers in the 19th century, which emphasized a classical curriculum rather than actual military history and practice.
John M from Ct.
5
Thank nypoet!
The last time I remember having this much fun reading the comments section was a Sunday night when I watched a music video from Miss Elizabeth, which invariably led to another video, and then pretty soon I got majorly behind watching cat videos.
Titanic with a Cat
And yes, the original Major-General's song - a parody of the course at the Royal school for officers in the 19th century, which emphasized a classical curriculum rather than actual military history and practice.
I know, right!? And so funny and brilliant wherein Gilbert and Sullivan even poke fun of their own work H.M.S. Pinafore. Is anyone keeping count of how many parodies of this parody have been done over time?
Despicable Me 3
Finally, in a shameless attempt to bring my comments back squarely on-topic: The Washington Monument on the National Mall in DC was completed in 1884, almost five full years after Gilbert and Sullivan's The Pirates of Penzance was first performed in America in New York City.
And, scene. :)
Kick for [6]
OK, twist my arm! How many parodies have there been? Who knows. But here's mine, that I did a couple of years ago for the comments section of *another* excellent political blog that I follow (Electoral Vote dot Com):
I am the very model of a Democratic liberal
I have correct opinions both the social and political
I am very well acquainted with all kinds of modern Wokery
It really hurts my Pride to hear it called the merest hokery
For LGB TQA+ I know just what they mean by Plus
The pronoun ‘me’ I never use, it’s what we always mean by ‘us’
To compliment another I must first be an inquirer
About the hurt they may endure on meeting an admirer
I feel the pain of everyone whose gendered self-identity
Has been denied by bakers or some other biased entity
In short, in my opinions both the social and political
I am the very model of a Democratic liberal
I know our racist history, from Jefferson to MAGA tribe
To say that All Lives Matter disrespects the many Blacks who died
Under the knees of whites who claimed to have a false supremacy
It’s for my fellows of all races that I’d rather bend my knee
For any cause in any land I’m ready to make loud protest
In search of justice peace and right I argue that we must divest
I march for colleges and firms to act in the affirmative
Reverse discrimination may provide a social curative
Then I can praise or pan some art that features tasteless nudities
It all depends who it offends with raw and chilly crudites
In short, in my opinions both the social and political
I am the very model of a Democratic liberal
In fact, when I know what is meant by ‘primary’ and ‘compromise’
When I can tell at sight a lib’ral-owning post in good disguise
When normal folk who shun elites attend my commentariat
And when I know precisely what is meant by ‘center-moderate’
When I have learnt what progress has been made in modern pollery
When I know more of dressing issues up with jokes and drollery
In short, when I can poll as well as biker/lib’ral Fetterman
You’ll say a Democratic liberal is now a better man
For my electoral knowledge, though I’m sensitive and so for real
Is stuck in La-La land like asking voters for a ‘Green New Deal’
But still, in my opinions both the social and political
I am the very model of a Democratic liberal
John
7
Wow, John! That is really good. Reminded me of something I heard very recently:
*
She's right, you know.
Remember when the GOP coined the politically charged slur "Obamacare" during the debate over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as a means for many in their voter base to transfer that visceral hatred of theirs for "Barack Hussein Obama" onto the healthcare bill? Remember how the attempt largely backfired because President Obama said he rather liked the term "Obamacare" because "Obama does care"?
I think that's how Democrats should handle the vast majority of the GOP's repetitive prattling nonsensical bullshit and hateful slurs: Go on the offensive.
All that to say: Great parody, John! :)
"According to the US Geological Society, Ukraine is listed as having precisely no rare earth reserves and zero existing rare earths mines, processing facilities or known reserves."
Ukraine Minerals Deal - High Risk, Low Reward