Elementary needs

This morning I read an article by the Scientific American editor David Biello on an important topic: the importance of rare earth elements for our economy, and the power of those few countries that export them on a larger scale. (disclaimer: Scientific American is part of Nature Publishing Group, my employer)

David hits an important point there. But to my mind, the problem is far more critical and fundamental than this single, focussed example suggests, and we need to act on it soon.

Salt production at Salar de Uyuni. This salt flat harbours 50% of the world's lithium reserves. Image by Ricampelo via Wikimedia Commons.

The issue is that rare earth elements such as neodymium are essential to green energy and our economy. Neodymium is part of Nd2Fe14B, a powerful permanent magnet that is used for electromotors, read heads of hard disk drives, etc. Each wind turbine apparently uses 300 kg of neodymium, each Toyota Prius about 1 kg. At present, China produces 97% of all neodymium.

And this is the problem. China has implemented export controls for its rare earth elements resources. In a recent diplomatic spat with Japan, they temporarily restricted the export of rare earth elements to Japan. But the Chinese should not take all the blame for a little realpolitik. Heard of the 1973 oil crisis?

So let’s not get distracted by politics for now. The problem I am describing is a wider one related to the fact that some elements are rarer than others. There is surely enough sand to make silicon for computers. Other elements, such as the rare earth family, are far less abundant. And often these resources are located in only a few countries. Bolivia has more than 50% of the world’s lithium reserves in the world’s largest salt flat, Salar de Uyuni. Lithium is important as part of lithium-ion batteries that are used also for the increasingly popular electric cars.

There are more examples. Tellurium and indium are used for solar cells, in the form of CdTe and CuInSe2, respectively. Boosting solar production of both types of solar cells by only a factor of two or three would quickly hit not only the limit of the entire world-wide production capacity, but also deplete all known resources relatively fast.

And even more depressingly, also seemingly mundane elements are in danger of running out. Phosphorus, which is essential to us humans as well as plants (think ADP/ATP), for this reason is widely used as a fertilizer. The main source of phosphorus is from mining, and Morocco holds about a third of all known resources. Some scientists predict that we will run out of phosphorus from mines within the next 50 to 100 years, because at the moment we tend to overfertilize our crops and wash this important resource into the oceans.

All these examples paint a gloomy picture on our use of elements. In many industrial materials and processes we carelessly use valuable resources and scarce elements. We have to recognize that in many cases we are running out of these resources, with dramatic implications to our economy. Unfortunately, the problem is not limited to the examples above. There are more, and we have to identify these weaknesses in our materials use. Research needs to be undertaken to replace devices and materials with alternatives that use more abundant alternatives. In case where there are no alternatives, we need to research them. And if that fails, or is clearly not applicable such in the case of phosphorus, we have to make sure that we use the resources we have most efficiently.

, , , , , , , ,

7 Comments on “Elementary needs”

  1. Neil Says:

    You’re damn right it’s a real problem. I heard several pretty eminent chemists discussing various methods for alternative energy technologies and there just isn’t enough of most elements for them to be used on a worldwide scale. Someone even said that there’s really only C, H, N and O that are abundant enough to store and release enough energy (based on eg 10wt% H storage targets) – let alone fancy Pt catalysts or Li batteries.

    By the way…phosphor0us? đŸ˜‰

  2. Joerg Heber Says:

    oops, you are right on phosphorus, is now corrected! (I am on a slow connection in China and skipped all checks… but no excuse đŸ˜‰

  3. Tim Jones Says:

    And helium was in the news as well recently. I must admit, I didn’t realize most of it came out the ground – somewhere in America I believe. I guess it’s one of those things folk don’t think about for any of these rare materials – we just assume they’ll keep coming.

    And to think iron and steel making capability used to be considered a prime strategic resource…

  4. Tim Harper Says:

    Oddly enough I was discussing the same thing in Geneva this week at the World Economic Forum (see http://cientifica.eu/blog/2010/10/predicting-the-future-and-keeping-it-bright/).

    The message is that we have to start thinking about these issues now, and develop alternative materials and/or processes before we start to feel the economic effect of mineral scarcity.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. How to get rich fast with batteries « All that matters - December 10, 2010

    […] materials. For example, there are attempts to replace the lithium in batteries altogether. Lithium is not very abundant and thus potentially expensive. Also, each lithium atom only carries a single electrical charge. […]

  2. The Fukushima debate misses the broader picture « All that matters - April 7, 2011

    […] and so on. But just as in the related case of systematic problems with renewables (such as the abundance of the chemical elements that go into wind turbines or into solar cells, as well as costs), I am confident that such […]