Shackling national security – and renewable energy

Now environmentalists say we need the minerals that they’ve been locking up for decades

Guest post by Paul Driessen

“China’s control of a key minerals market has US military thinkers and policy makers worried about access to materials that are essential for 21st-century technology like smartphones – and smart bombs,” the Wall Street Journal reports. Plus stealth fighter jets, digital cameras, computer hard drives – and wind turbine magnets, solar panels, hybrid and electric car batteries, compact fluorescent light bulbs, catalytic converters, and more.

China’s dominance in mining and processing 17 “rare earth” metals “has raised alarms in Washington,” says the Journal. These unique metallic elements have powerful magnetic properties that make them sine qua non for high-tech, miniaturized and renewable energy equipment.

China currently produces fully 97% of the world’s rare-earth oxides, the raw materials that can be refined into metals and blended into specialty alloys for defense, commercial and power-generation components. However, the Middle Kingdom has slashed its rare-earth oxide and metal exports.

Beijing claims to be motivated by environmental concerns – reflecting the fact that rare earths are present in very low concentrations, mountains of rock must be mined, crushed and processed to get usable metals, and every step in the process requires oil, gasoline or coal-based electricity. A more likely reason is that the Chinese want to manufacture the finished goods, thereby creating countless “green” factory jobs, paid for with US and EU taxpayer subsidies, channeled through GE, Siemens, Vestas and other “socially responsible” companies that then install the systems across Europe and the USA.

So here we are, long beholden to foreign powers for petroleum – and newly dependent on foreign powers for “green” energy. National security issues (direct defense needs and indirect dependency issues) once again rise to the fore, and the Defense Department, Government Accountability Office, House Science and Technology Committee and others are busily issuing reports, holding hearings and expressing consternation. Congressman Bart Gordon (D-TN) worries that the United States is being “held hostage.”

As well he should. However, the fault lies not in our stars, but in ourselves – or more precisely in our militant environmentalists.

Back in 1978, I ruined a perfectly pleasant hike in a RARE-II roadless area, by asking an impertinent question. “How do you defend prohibiting any kind of energy or mineral exploration in wilderness study areas?” I asked Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Rupert Cutler and Forest Service Chief John McGuire, “The 1964 Wilderness Act expressly allows and encourages those activities, so that Congress and the American people can make informed decisions about how to manage these lands, based on extensive information about both surface and subsurface values. How do you defend ignoring that provision?”

“I don’t think Congress should have enacted that provision,” Dr. Cutler replied.

“That may be your opinion,” I responded. “But Congress did enact it, and you are obligated by your oath of office to follow the law the way it was written, not the way you think it should have been written.”

“I think we’ve said enough to this guy,” Cutler said to Chief McGuire, and they walked away.

A couple months later, I asked the Denver Sierra Club wilderness coordinator a related question: “Why are you focusing so heavily on areas with the best energy and mineral potential? Isn’t that going to impact prices, jobs and national security?”

“Americans use too much energy, and they’re not going to change voluntarily,” he said. “The only way to make them change is to take the resources away. And the best way to do that is put them in wilderness.”

And every other restrictive land use category that arrogant, thoughtless activists, bureaucrats, judges and politicians can devise, he might have added. Which is how we got where we are today.

As of 1994, over 410 million acres were effectively off limits to mineral exploration and development, according to consulting geologist Courtland Lee, who prepared probably the last definitive analysis, published in The Professional Geologist. That’s 62% of the nation’s public lands – an area nearly equal to Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming combined – primarily in Alaska and our eleven westernmost Lower 48 states. Today, sixteen years later, the situation is much worse – with millions more acres locked up in wilderness, park, preserve, wildlife refuge, wilderness study and other restrictive land use categories, or simply made unavailable by bureaucratic fiat or foot-dragging.

Due to forces unleashed by plate tectonics, these rugged lands contain some of the most highly mineralized mountain and desert areas in North America. They almost certainly hold dozens, perhaps hundreds, of world-class rare-earth deposits. The vast mineral wealth extracted from those areas since the mid-1850s portends what might still be there, to be discovered by modern prospecting gadgets and methods. But unless laws and attitudes change, we will never know.

How ironic. First eco-activists lock up the raw materials. Then they force-feed us “renewable energy standards” that require the very materials they’ve locked up, which we’ve never much needed until now. Thus China (and perhaps other countries a few years hence) will happily fill the breach, creating green jobs beyond our borders, selling us the finished components, and using our tax dollars to subsidize the imported wind turbines, solar panels and CFL bulbs that are driving energy costs through the roof.

Science historian James Burke became famous for chronicling the “Connections” between successions of past discoveries and achievements and various modern technologies. Unfortunately, today’s increasingly powerful and power-hungry activists, jurists, legislators and regulators cannot see the connection between their actions and the economic havoc they leave in their wake.

Of course, there is little incentive for them to do so. They know they will rarely be held accountable. Others may freeze jobless in the dark – but most of them will keep their jobs, perks, pensions, positions of power over our lives, economy and civil rights progress.

However, there are bright spots. The upcoming elections offer hope for a general House (and Senate) cleaning. A recent poll found that a third of all Americans don’t want to pay even $12 a year in higher energy costs, even to create “green” jobs or forestall Climate Armageddon. Many people are simply fed up – with Washington, and with constant assertions of imminent eco-catastrophes.

A steady stream of shale-gas discoveries in Europe and the United States suggests that we still have plentiful supplies of cheap natural gas. Evidence is mounting that petroleum is abiogenic in origin – and natural forces deep inside the Earth are constantly creating new hydrocarbons from elemental carbon and hydrogen. Both developments undermine a principle argument for pricey, land-intensive, intermittent wind and solar power: that we are running out of “fossil fuels.”

Just north of the Mojave Desert, near Mountain Pass, California, Molycorp is working to restart mining operations at the largest rare-earth deposit outside of China. They had been suspended in 2002, for economic, permitting and environmental reasons that have since been resolved. China’s Baotou Rare Earth Company was a happy beneficiary of the circumstances and US regulatory excesses.

Now there is hope that common sense will prevail at Mountain Pass, new processing methods will reduce costs and environmental impacts, and exploration may one day be permitted in areas locked up by Cutler & Company. Too many technologies depend on lanthanides to keep US deposits under lock and key.

Radical greens may not give a spotted owl hoot about military needs. But they may care enough about preserving their dream of a hydrocarbon-free future, while a few politicians may want to ensure that tens of billions in taxpayer subsidies for wind and solar power and electric cars don’t all head overseas.

___________

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.Cfact.org) and Congress of Racial Equality (www.CongressOfRacialEquality.org), and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death. He has degrees in geology, ecology and environmental law.

Greens shackle national security – and renewable energy

Now environmentalists say we need the minerals that they’ve been locking up for decades

Paul Driessen

China’s control of a key minerals market has US military thinkers and policy makers worried about access to materials that are essential for 21st-century technology like smartphones – and smart bombs,” the Wall Street Journal reports. Plus stealth fighter jets, digital cameras, computer hard drives – and wind turbine magnets, solar panels, hybrid and electric car batteries, compact fluorescent light bulbs, catalytic converters, and more.

China’s dominance in mining and processing 17 “rare earth” metals “has raised alarms in Washington,” says the Journal. These unique metallic elements have powerful magnetic properties that make them sine qua non for high-tech, miniaturized and renewable energy equipment.

China currently produces fully 97% of the world’s rare-earth oxides, the raw materials that can be refined into metals and blended into specialty alloys for defense, commercial and power-generation components. However, the Middle Kingdom has slashed its rare-earth oxide and metal exports.

Beijing claims to be motivated by environmental concerns – reflecting the fact that rare earths are present in very low concentrations, mountains of rock must be mined, crushed and processed to get usable metals, and every step in the process requires oil, gasoline or coal-based electricity. A more likely reason is that the Chinese want to manufacture the finished goods, thereby creating countless “green” factory jobs, paid for with US and EU taxpayer subsidies, channeled through GE, Siemens, Vestas and other “socially responsible” companies that then install the systems across Europe and the USA.

So here we are, long beholden to foreign powers for petroleum – and newly dependent on foreign powers for “green” energy. National security issues (direct defense needs and indirect dependency issues) once again rise to the fore, and the Defense Department, Government Accountability Office, House Science and Technology Committee and others are busily issuing reports, holding hearings and expressing consternation. Congressman Bart Gordon (D-TN) worries that the United States is being “held hostage.”

As well he should. However, the fault lies not in our stars, but in ourselves – or more precisely in our militant environmentalists.

Back in 1978, I ruined a perfectly pleasant hike in a RARE-II roadless area, by asking an impertinent question. “How do you defend prohibiting any kind of energy or mineral exploration in wilderness study areas?” I asked Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Rupert Cutler and Forest Service Chief John McGuire, “The 1964 Wilderness Act expressly allows and encourages those activities, so that Congress and the American people can make informed decisions about how to manage these lands, based on extensive information about both surface and subsurface values. How do you defend ignoring that provision?”

I don’t think Congress should have enacted that provision,” Dr. Cutler replied.

That may be your opinion,” I responded. “But Congress did enact it, and you are obligated by your oath of office to follow the law the way it was written, not the way you think it should have been written.”

I think we’ve said enough to this guy,” Cutler said to Chief McGuire, and they walked away.

A couple months later, I asked the Denver Sierra Club wilderness coordinator a related question: “Why are you focusing so heavily on areas with the best energy and mineral potential? Isn’t that going to impact prices, jobs and national security?”

Americans use too much energy, and they’re not going to change voluntarily,” he said. “The only way to make them change is to take the resources away. And the best way to do that is put them in wilderness.”

And every other restrictive land use category that arrogant, thoughtless activists, bureaucrats, judges and politicians can devise, he might have added. Which is how we got where we are today.

As of 1994, over 410 million acres were effectively off limits to mineral exploration and development, according to consulting geologist Courtland Lee, who prepared probably the last definitive analysis, published in The Professional Geologist. That’s 62% of the nation’s public lands – an area nearly equal to Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming combined – primarily in Alaska and our eleven westernmost Lower 48 states. Today, sixteen years later, the situation is much worse – with millions more acres locked up in wilderness, park, preserve, wildlife refuge, wilderness study and other restrictive land use categories, or simply made unavailable by bureaucratic fiat or foot-dragging.

Due to forces unleashed by plate tectonics, these rugged lands contain some of the most highly mineralized mountain and desert areas in North America. They almost certainly hold dozens, perhaps hundreds, of world-class rare-earth deposits. The vast mineral wealth extracted from those areas since the mid-1850s portends what might still be there, to be discovered by modern prospecting gadgets and methods. But unless laws and attitudes change, we will never know.

How ironic. First eco-activists lock up the raw materials. Then they force-feed us “renewable energy standards” that require the very materials they’ve locked up, which we’ve never much needed until now. Thus China (and perhaps other countries a few years hence) will happily fill the breach, creating green jobs beyond our borders, selling us the finished components, and using our tax dollars to subsidize the imported wind turbines, solar panels and CFL bulbs that are driving energy costs through the roof.

Science historian James Burke became famous for chronicling the “Connections” between successions of past discoveries and achievements and various modern technologies. Unfortunately, today’s increasingly powerful and power-hungry activists, jurists, legislators and regulators cannot see the connection between their actions and the economic havoc they leave in their wake.

Of course, there is little incentive for them to do so. They know they will rarely be held accountable. Others may freeze jobless in the dark – but most of them will keep their jobs, perks, pensions, positions of power over our lives, economy and civil rights progress.

However, there are bright spots. The upcoming elections offer hope for a general House (and Senate) cleaning. A recent poll found that a third of all Americans don’t want to pay even $12 a year in higher energy costs, even to create “green” jobs or forestall Climate Armageddon. Many people are simply fed up – with Washington, and with constant assertions of imminent eco-catastrophes.

A steady stream of shale-gas discoveries in Europe and the United States suggests that we still have plentiful supplies of cheap natural gas. Evidence is mounting that petroleum is abiogenic in origin – and natural forces deep inside the Earth are constantly creating new hydrocarbons from elemental carbon and hydrogen. Both developments undermine a principle argument for pricey, land-intensive, intermittent wind and solar power: that we are running out of “fossil fuels.”

Just north of the Mojave Desert, near Mountain Pass, California, Molycorp is working to restart mining operations at the largest rare-earth deposit outside of China. They had been suspended in 2002, for economic, permitting and environmental reasons that have since been resolved. China’s Baotou Rare Earth Company was a happy beneficiary of the circumstances and US regulatory excesses.

Now there is hope that common sense will prevail at Mountain Pass, new processing methods will reduce costs and environmental impacts, and exploration may one day be permitted in areas locked up by Cutler & Company. Too many technologies depend on lanthanides to keep US deposits under lock and key.

Radical greens may not give a spotted owl hoot about military needs. But they may care enough about preserving their dream of a hydrocarbon-free future, while a few politicians may want to ensure that tens of billions in taxpayer subsidies for wind and solar power and electric cars don’t all head overseas.

___________

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.Cfact.org) and Congress of Racial Equality (www.CongressOfRacialEquality.org), and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death. He has degrees in geology, ecology and environmental law.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
133 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 4, 2010 3:20 pm

This is precisely what the environmentalists want; the USA beholden to Communist China for our Rare-Earth materials, pulling us further to the left from our capitalist roots. What’s next – The prohibtion of growing wheat and corn in the USA? The Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves.

October 4, 2010 3:24 pm

“Even if you restrict to the abiotic theory, it means that oil has been being generated for some 3.5 billion years, continuously, not from just one period in the planet’s existence.”
And there in is a problem for abiotic oil. All oil fields are found in formations from a very few geological periods in the last 300 million years.

Alexander Gumen
October 4, 2010 5:21 pm

“And there in is a problem for abiotic oil. All oil fields are found in formations from a very few geological periods in the last 300 million years”.
On the contrary, this is a problem for organic oil. From here: http://www.searchanddiscovery.com/documents/abstracts/2005research_calgary/abstracts/extended/kitchka/kitchka.htm:
“simple calculations based on average present-day rates and volumes (a conservative estimate) of hydrocarbon seepages on land and sea testify that at the present rate of seepage the world’s conventional oil reserves (proven to this date) should disappear in no more than one million years”

October 4, 2010 8:34 pm

Interesting, not one location example of any of this was referenced, so no way to check what empirical evidence there is to support the premise.
However, I can tell you that I have experience in fluid migration in magmatic and metamorphic rocks of Protozoic age. Back in 1988 I did research on Polonium halos found in mica and flourite crystals. They were being used as evidence that the world was created in 3 minutes. The results of my research and literature search showed that the area in Bancroft Ontario is the reminents of once very high mountains. The rocks formed as “basement” rocks to those mountains. Exposed now, 900myo they were 15 to 25km under the surface. Much megmatic fluid migration took place (that produced the halos also altered the rock chemistry), much magatic intrusions took place. Pegmatites were mined up there for a variety of minerals. Though inclusions of wall rock is common in the pegmatites, not one had any inclusions of hydrocarbons (it would have been noted in the literature if there was). Except one location. A marble that had concentric rings of carbon in the matrix. Fossil stromatolites.
So without a specific location the shows this process happening or has happened, I have a hard time accepting that this paper discredits the decades of oil geology based on an organic origin. Fields are found based on the types of fossils found in various layers.
I have not heard of any of the deep wells (>12,000 meters) finding anything in that paper.

Khwarizmi
October 5, 2010 10:48 am

jrwakefield: “The question I would have is if abiotic oil is true, how come not one spent deposit is refilling? “
Eugene Island 330 is just one. Mike Ruppert lost a $1000 bet on that same question, and refused to pay up when shown the evidence:
==========
WSJ, April 1999
HOUSTON — Something mysterious is going on at Eugene Island 330.
Production at the oil field, deep in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana, was supposed to have declined years ago. And for a while, it behaved like any normal field: Following its 1973 discovery, Eugene Island 330’s output peaked at about 15,000 barrels a day. By 1989, production had slowed to about 4,000 barrels a day.
Then suddenly — some say almost inexplicably — Eugene Island’s fortunes reversed. The field, operated by PennzEnergy Co., is now producing 13,000 barrels a day, and probable reserves have rocketed to more than 400 million barrels from 60 million. Stranger still, scientists studying the field say the crude coming out of the pipe is of a geological age quite different from the oil that gushed 10 years ago.
http://www.science-frontiers.com/sf124/sf124p10.htm
==========
See also, “Petroleum geology: Raining hydrocarbons in the Gulf,”
Geotimes, 2003:
http://www.geotimes.org/june03/NN_gulf.html
Your “source rock” doesn’t account for the haze of complex hydrocarbons on Titan, the hydrocarbon rain and lakes, nor does it overcome that enthalpy problem detailed in the PNAS paper regarding the Origin of Hydrocarbon Species, by Kenney, et al.

R. de Haan
October 5, 2010 6:46 pm
Editor
October 6, 2010 5:50 am

Khwarizmi says:
October 5, 2010 at 10:48 am

jrwakefield: “The question I would have is if abiotic oil is true, how come not one spent deposit is refilling?”
Eugene Island 330 is just one. Mike Ruppert lost a $1000 bet on that same question, and refused to pay up when shown the evidence:
==========
WSJ, April 1999
HOUSTON — Something mysterious is going on at Eugene Island 330.

Please report both sides of the story. From http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.163.5567&rep=rep1&type=pdf Jean Laherrère

This increase in reserve estimate is so unusual that it led to an article in the Wall Street Journal by Christopher Cooper on April 16, 1999 entitled “Oil: a renewable resource? – Odd reservoir off Louisiana Prods Petroleum Experts To Seek a Deeper Meaning” suggesting that oil was coming from deeper sources (as for Gold’s theory from the mantle) explaining the large increase in the Middle East during the 1980s! It is really nonsense.
In fact, the Eugene Island oil and gas field is flanked by the largest and best known fault in the Gulf (the Red Fault), which puts the reservoir in direct communication with the source rocks. Evidently, the rapid depletion of the reservoir dropped the pressure allowing it to be recharged that oil and gas from the source-rocks. But the declines have resumed, adding (from 370 Mb to 420 Mb) only about 10 % in the total reserve value. If the field had been produced with a smoother way, the decline should have been less leading to the same ultimate. But in financial term it is more profitable to produce quicker provided that the reservoir is not damaged by water coning in the process.

I wouldn’t have paid off, but I wouldn’t have made the bet, either.
Laherrère is a peak oil proponent, but he seems reasonably fair. You might find interesting stuff at http://www.hubbertpeak.com/laherrere/CERN200510.pdf though things have changed a bit in the last five years.

Khwarizmi
October 6, 2010 9:26 pm

Thanks Rick Werme,
The “other side of the story” doesn’t overcome the problem with enthalpy, explain the hydrocarbons on Titan, or the closure of the most efficient and profitable refinery in the U.S.
I notice it is very easy to find the chemical equation for photosynthesis — but not for hydrocarbon synthesis.
cheers,
Leon.

1 4 5 6