outrageous, EU& US file complaint against China for not exporting ..

I've read that the real reason US put various environmental laws in place against drilling for oil in the US is to preserve the local oil reserves while buying foreign oil with green papers of which we certainly don't have a shortage.

Maybe China should also have cited environmental reasons for banning mining of rare-metals. Stop mining rare metal to protect tress & cute little animals would sound so nice the the media, wouldn't it ?

100% agreed to Schumacher.

I've been watching this thread for sometime. The topic is completely political, how come it can keep itself opened until today? Where are the mods and what do they think?

cmb=1968 said:

Legally china can do what ever they want with their resources, but they are in violation of the Spirit of the WTO which tries in principle to promote trade.

Click to expand...

Not if China reclassify those materials having military implications. then they wouldn't be subject under WTO.

SteelBird said:

100% agreed to Schumacher.

I've been watching this thread for sometime. The topic is completely political, how come it can keep itself opened until today? Where are the mods and what do they think?

Click to expand...

Topic merits some discussion but if it goes too warmed up, it will get closed.

The hole WTO is a house of cards that could cllapse in the near future and every economist compares the present economic problem with the Great depression.

When the Depresion was starting many were advising agaist a protectonist response which was ignored many beleve that coused the problem to became worse.

cmb=1968 said:

We only change when we are forced to, and China's decision might force Industry to adapt which will make china's resources less valuable in the long run.

Click to expand...

How about sticking to reality. The fact is that at the moment Chinas got what the USA hasn't but wants and if China was to say nope nyet nada as of next month, then th USA could be in deep SH... Known alternatives aren't in existence and suitable replacements could take decades and may not be as successful as hoped.Meanwhile does USA technology development, slow down, for want of these materials?, or the alternatives are prohibitively expensive.

bladerunner said:

How about sticking to reality. The fact is that at the moment Chinas got what the USA hasn't but wants and if China was to say nope nyet nada as of next month, then th USA could be in deep SH... Known alternatives aren't in existence and suitable replacements could take decades and may not be as successful as hoped.Meanwhile does USA technology development, slow down, for want of these materials?

Click to expand...

The US developed alternatives to Silk, (nylon) natural rubber,
and invented Teflon and many other technology all in five years douring WWII.

If you doubt the ability of science to develop alternatives to certain materials hear is a link to read.

The alternative you are referring to is the use completely new materials. Rare-earth materials are additives used in metallurgy. So, unless the west completely discard the use of metals, or find other types of additives as substitutes, it is unrealistic to think that they can eliminate their dependencies on rare-earth materials.

cmb=1968 said:

The US developed alternatives to Silk, (nylon) natural rubber,
and invented Teflon and many other technology all in five years douring WWII.

If you doubt the ability of science to develop alternatives to certain materials hear is a link to read.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

That was a war time setting, where the incentive to create things has been more urgent than product development in periods of peace.eg WW@ saw the introduction of the jet engine a lot sooner than would have been expected.

What about the cost factor? These new products might be several times dear per tonne than China wants for the rare earth metals.. That will kill any incentive, as to date price fixing by China has reduced any incentive for the West to establish any meaningful processing plant to make use of the rare metals that dont lie in Chinas domain.

Meanwhile Ill give you the fact that nylon has been a extremely successful product in its own right, but can it do everything silk can?
eg I understand that silk was worn as a undergarment by troops in ancient times, because it could not be pierced by a arrow? Does nylon have that property if true?

In short DIFERRENT TIME PLACE AND CIRCUMSTANCES.

bladerunner said:

What about the cost factor? These new products might be several times dear per tonne than China wants for the rare earth metals.. That will kill any incentive, as to date price fixing by China has reduced any incentive for the West to establish any meaningful processing plant to make use of the rare metals that dont lie in Chinas domain.

Meanwhile Ill give you the fact that nylon has been a extremely successful product in its own right, but can it do everything silk can?
eg I understand that silk was worn as a undergarment by troops in ancient times, because it could not be pierced by a arrow? Does nylon have that property if true?

Click to expand...

I was manly talking about material like silicon used to make poly silicon that is used in semiconductors which the article listed as one of the materials to have a tariff placed on it.
The Web sight science daily had a article about the use of Graphene to replace copper interconnects on microprocessors.
That would allow denser more powerful Microprocessors, or more to be placed on a silicon wafer their by reducing to price of the chips, and the total value of the poly silicon market.

The main use of silk by the US military was in the parachutes which nylon replaced.
Japan controlled the main source of silk which necessitated the development of a alternative.
Nylon was also used tn the first generation of light compact flack vest.

The US is at war now.