Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Yumewomiteru t1_ivzwqwx wrote

Given China's large market share in rare earth mining this is a very important discovery for the environment.

59

mutherhrg OP t1_ivye8r8 wrote

Heavy rare earth elements (HREEs) such as Gd–Lu, Sc and Y are irreplaceable metals for a number of critical (including clean) technologies, but they are scarce. Ion-adsorption deposits, which form within weathering crusts, supply more than 95% of the global HREE demand. However, these deposits are currently mined via ammonium-salt-based leaching techniques that are responsible for severe environmental damage and show low recovery efficiency. As a result, the adoption of such techniques is restricted for REE mining, further exacerbating REE scarcity, which in turn could lead to supply chain disruptions. Here we report the design of an innovative REE mining technique, electrokinetic mining (EKM), which enables green, efficient and selective recovery of REEs from weathering crusts. Its feasibility is demonstrated via bench-scale, scaled-up and on-site field experiments. Compared with conventional techniques, EKM achieves ~2.6 times higher recovery efficiency, an ~80% decrease in leaching agent usage and a ~70% reduction in metallic impurities in the obtained REEs. As an additional benefit, the results point to an autonomous purification mechanism for REE enrichment, wherein the separation process is based on the mobility and reactivity diversity between REEs and metallic impurities. Overall, the evidence presented suggests that EKM is a viable mining technique, revealing new paths for the sustainable harvesting of natural resources.

25

BadDadWhy t1_ivykwpm wrote

Does anyone have a link to a non paywalled version?

23

qqite t1_iw14umj wrote

Can we please outright ban all links to paywalled websites? If a website is shitty enough to need a paywall, they shouldn't get free traffic from reddit... Don't support this crap.

9

rmonjay t1_iw2idus wrote

> “Don’t support academic research!🤬”

Okay guy, you do you.

5

JUST_PM_ME_SMT t1_iw32l5g wrote

They are right tho I don't see why anyone should support these publishers. The researchers pay them money so the papers are published in the journal and the reader has to pay to read them. The peer review is done normally for free. So how can anyone support this kind of greedy organization?

2

rmonjay t1_iw3abiw wrote

The authors pay to have them “Open Access” (i.e., not behind the paywall). Since this article is not free, these authors did not pay for it to be Open Access.

It sure is greedy for a publication to want to pay its bills and salaries and not just operate as a charity. /s

1

JUST_PM_ME_SMT t1_iw3e41f wrote

It's not just for open access papers that researchers need to pay to these publishing companies. They call it article processing charges. Sure these publishing companies need money to exist, but the total amount they get from both readers and writers is wayy above the needed maintenance fees especially since lots of publishing houses dont have huge physical hq anymore. So it makes you think, the writers don't get paid, the peer reviewers don't get paid, so where does all the money goes?

1

rmonjay t1_iw3grd1 wrote

The amount that Nature, one of the premier science publications, receives in revenue is more than the cost of publishing it. They have dozens of offices and more than 800 staff around the world. They also publish more than 150 other, much less profitable (or even not profitable) academic journals.

If you think that is representative of academic publishing in general, than I suggest you look a bit more closely. Having generally accepted academic journals is a societal benefit. If the schools wanted to publish these papers, like they do in other disciplines, that could be an alternative. However, as long there is no viable alternative, then someone has to pay to collate this information and make it generally accessible.

1

JUST_PM_ME_SMT t1_iw3hwgg wrote

Hmm I guess that Nature IS more well known than arxiv by the general public so I guess there are merits for paid publishers if just to make average Joe more interested in science

1

RestlessAmbivert t1_iw0nqk3 wrote

Interesting that this comes out around the same time as an announcement that US & UK scientist have discovered a means of creating rare earth metals in a lab. Certainly not bad if both outcomes come to pass.

3

Bender-Ender t1_iw13dec wrote

It is interesting but not perfectly related. Neodymium and praseodymium are the rare earth elements used predominantly for making powerful magnets and they are part of the LREE group, rather than the HREE group. (Your news is actually probably more significant though, because Nd/Pr are needed in greater quantities than HREEs and, if that new synthetic mineral can be produced in large quantities, that would be very important.)

China has a near monopoly on production of both HREE & LREEs.

With LREEs, China benefits from a very significant natural abundance of Nd/Pr at an old iron ore mine called Bayan Obo. That deposit has such good grades and quantities, as well as basically being a free biproduct of the iron ore production, that it just ends up naturally with incredibly low production costs.

With HREEs China maintains a production cost advantage because they don't have as strong of environmental regulations. This is where this article and associated propaganda come in. For decades Chinese producers have just dumped chemicals directly in the ground and collected the pregnant leachate from downstream, disregarding the environmental impacts but basically taking the cost of mining (blasting, digging, trucking) out of the equation. Now they're probably trying to greenwash the in situ extraction method by claiming this kind of process is being used.

5

Lopsided_Web5432 t1_iw0oj8p wrote

Saskatchewan just getting started with HREE. Just poured the first ingots a few weeks ago. And Saskatchewan has lots. No more Chinese monopoly

3

Bender-Ender t1_iw1103q wrote

So good to hear. What mine/company?

2

Lopsided_Web5432 t1_iw12fhv wrote

It’s salt water that comes naturally out of oil wells and it’s being subsidized by the federal and provincial governments right now. The reason being is that when private companies have tried to start up themselves the Chinese flooded the market making it very difficult for the private sector. I’m not an expert but I did read and heard on the radio about it. They poured the first ingots in Saskatoon Saskatchewan a few weeks ago

2

darth_nadoma t1_iw1uxm6 wrote

Yay. More Rare Earth Metals! Liberals would no longer be against expanding domestic production in the USA.

2

Ducky181 t1_iw74fnu wrote

The problem and issue with these articles are that they function in many ways as China based propaganda. As they fail to convey the entire context, and larger circumstances involved.

Due to much lower levels of environmental regulation, Chinese companies have had a huge Heavy Rare Earth mining cost advantage over western companies for decades. As they commonly engage in techniques that entails the discharge of harmful chemicals into the ground and then the collection of pregnant leachates at a downstream location. This process eliminates the need for more expensive, but more environmentally friendly techniques such as blasting and excavation. They are likely seeking to minimise their extraction procedure by claiming the mentioned aforementioned approaches are being used.

2

FuturologyBot t1_ivyjz21 wrote

The following submission statement was provided by /u/mutherhrg:

Heavy rare earth elements (HREEs) such as Gd–Lu, Sc and Y are irreplaceable metals for a number of critical (including clean) technologies, but they are scarce. Ion-adsorption deposits, which form within weathering crusts, supply more than 95% of the global HREE demand. However, these deposits are currently mined via ammonium-salt-based leaching techniques that are responsible for severe environmental damage and show low recovery efficiency. As a result, the adoption of such techniques is restricted for REE mining, further exacerbating REE scarcity, which in turn could lead to supply chain disruptions. Here we report the design of an innovative REE mining technique, electrokinetic mining (EKM), which enables green, efficient and selective recovery of REEs from weathering crusts. Its feasibility is demonstrated via bench-scale, scaled-up and on-site field experiments. Compared with conventional techniques, EKM achieves ~2.6 times higher recovery efficiency, an ~80% decrease in leaching agent usage and a ~70% reduction in metallic impurities in the obtained REEs. As an additional benefit, the results point to an autonomous purification mechanism for REE enrichment, wherein the separation process is based on the mobility and reactivity diversity between REEs and metallic impurities. Overall, the evidence presented suggests that EKM is a viable mining technique, revealing new paths for the sustainable harvesting of natural resources.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/ysdamy/chinese_scientist_develop_new_method_of_rare/ivye8r8/

1

moriluka_go_hard t1_iw1wgcw wrote

Wasnt there just another article that said they synthesized a rare earth in a lab?

1

my_stupidquestions t1_iw2ce5s wrote

China and sustainable energy in the futurology sub?

This is going to make some ancaps REE

1

runswithcoyotes t1_ivyz8bs wrote

Fewer, Nature. Fewer.

0

grundar t1_iw16lco wrote

> Fewer, Nature. Fewer

Are they using fewer types of toxic chemicals, or less volume of toxic chemicals? If the latter, Nature is right.

5

Kickstand8604 t1_iw11lzv wrote

I'll see if this is able to be replicated. I always take Chinese research with a pound of salt

−3

Eli-Thail t1_iw1zhfu wrote

Thank you for your valuable input, person who has no idea what's even written in the paper.

9

master_jeriah t1_iw5i82s wrote

Lol China isn't developing anything except stealing tech from other countries and claiming it their own.

−3

Bender-Ender t1_ivzdqj7 wrote

So... As opposed to dumping chemicals on the ground, waiting for them to percolate through and then trying to collect as much as possible of the pregnant chemicals at the bottom of a hill, this process does the same thing but electrifies the ground as well. With reduction in the quantity of chemicals used.

Yep, really green.

Edit: Hmmm... The only other comment that isn't deleted is one praising the tech and how important it is for China and the environment. Seems like some good ol' fashion all-genuine-non-state-influenced redditting going on here.

−24

DarthMeow504 t1_ivzqtzq wrote

I'd call an 80% reduction in the amount of chemicals used a pretty darned significant improvement all by itself, not even counting the other benefits.

33

Bender-Ender t1_ivzuncn wrote

Okay sure, yes it would be. Except the alternative is a 100% reduction in chemicals poured into the ground like the way it's done everywhere except China. First you dig it up to isolate it from the environment then you process it.

−15