Wednesday, February 11, 2026

You, tax payer, Just Bought A Mining Co.

https://www.hinrichfoundation.com/research/article/trade-geopolitics/us-puts-price-floor-against-china-rare-earth-dominance


Photo is unattributed.

No telling where or what it is, but it's in the original article


The above link is to the article below. For reasons unknown, I expect this article to disappear. 


Beijing’s recent export controls on permanent magnets put in stark relief the West’s continued reliance on Chinese supply. Policy interventions in the 15 years since China first used its dominance over global rare earths supply, via a de facto embargo on Japan over a geopolitical dispute, have almost universally failed to bridge the divide between what customers are willing to pay and the project economics of Western suppliers undercut by state-subsidized Chinese rivals.

This may be about to change. The Trump Administration in July 2025 made the most decisive intervention by any Western government to date to create a complete mine-to-magnet rare earths value chain. The US Department of Defense (DoD)’s deal with American miner MP Materials included an offtake agreement for permanent magnets and, crucially, provides a guaranteed floor price for a key rare earth input neodymium-praseodymium (NdPr). This floor price extends to the NdPr content in products that MP Materials will manufacture, including permanent magnets.

The MP Materials deal is unlikely to be a one-off. Deals in the works in Washington and other allied capitals could catalyze the emergence of a series of ex-China price premiums that aim to ultimately de-risk rare earths and move permanent magnet production outside China.

None of this will be simple. The US and its allies will need to coordinate to ensure that public funds are targeted at areas of the supply chain where China’s control is most entrenched. Skills shortages after decades of offshoring are one of several formidable challenges.

Anatomy of US industrial decline

It is sometimes forgotten that the US once dominated rare earths. California’s Mountain Pass mine produced the majority of the world’s rare earths right up until the late 1980s.

Around the same time, General Motors (GM) discovered and commercialized neodymium magnets. Neodymium magnets, which contain metals produced from rare earth elements neodymium and praseodymium, are a type of permanent magnet. They are integral to the functioning of electric motors, wind turbines, and defense technologies relying on guidance and propulsion.

But in a story that is now familiar, the advent of unfettered globalization led to the neglect of economic resilience. In 1995 and with US government approval, GM sold its magnet business, Magnequench, to Chinese investors as part of a cost-reduction drive. The deal likely helped expedite GM’s efforts to open an additional Chinese auto production line.1

Magnequench’s Indiana plant was shut in 2006, with remaining operations offshored to China.2 Struggling to remain competitive with Chinese rivals, Mountain Pass was mothballed for most of the 15 years between 2002 and 2017, before being acquired and reopened by MP Materials.

The atrophying of Western rare earths capability – France was a major player in rare earths processing too, until the mid-1980s – allowed China to achieve a near-monopoly.3Today, China is home to 60% of rare earths mining, 85% of rare earths processing, and 92% of permanent magnets manufacturing.

An Achilles heel hiding in plain sight

The possibility that China would one day seek to weaponize its rare earths and permanent magnets monopoly was hardly outlandish. China first limited shipments of certain rare earths to Japan in 2010. Nine years later, President Xi Jinping made a very deliberate visit to a permanent magnet factory at the height of the first Sino-US trade war.

Export controls imposed on US-bounds shipments of graphite, gallium, and germanium across 2023 were another warning sign. Whilst few in Washington or corporate America could credibly claim surprise, it was remarkable how ill-prepared swaths of industry were when China severely curtailed permanent magnet exports in April 2025.

The resulting scramble to find alternative supply led to an unsettling realization: there was almost no uncontracted supply outside China. GM re-entered the game in 2021 by signing an offtake agreement with MP Materials, but the miner turned magnet manufacturer will only achieve full-scale commercial production later this year.

The ability to shutter US production lines at will has given Xi a potent weapon, far superior to anything hitherto deployed in China’s economic arsenal.

It would be inaccurate to say that there were no serious efforts to disrupt China’s near-monopoly. Billions of dollars are being spent on mines, refineries, and magnet projects across the US, European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Australia.

But getting projects off the ground means little if they can’t find customers. The prevailing approach, especially in the West, relied on companies like GM making a strategic decision to pay a premium for non-Chinese supply. Whilst Australian company Lynas competes on cost with Chinese rivals, it is an outlier.

The sobering reality is that, absent the threat of factory closures, few Western manufacturers have been willing to pay the types of sustained premiums that suppliers need to compete. Although it is easy to criticize manufacturers, companies are facing their own challenges, including the costly transition to electric vehicles. The few permanent magnets made in the US are roughly 50% more expensive than Chinese supply.4

Iluka Resouces, an Australian company building a rare earths refinery in Western Australia, will require NdPr prices of between US$82-US$148 per kilogram to turn a profit, far above current market prices of around US$63. Prices on the Asian Metals Index (AMI), the industry’s major price discovery venue, are opaque and prone to manipulation. They are largely set by state-backed and often highly marginal or loss-making Chinese companies, unconstrained by the imperatives of Western shareholder-driven markets.5 Chinese companies have kept mining even when prices are significantly below the cost of production.

Creating a US national rare earths champion

A step change in approach, invariably involving government intervention, was clearly required.

Under the terms of Trump’s deal with MP Materials, the DoD will take a 15% stake in MP Materials and loan the company US$150 million to expand its nascent heavy rare earth separation facilities.

More novel is the DoD’s commitment to effectively underwrite MP Materials’ second permanent magnet factory, which is scheduled to open in 2028. The DoD will purchase 7,000 metric tons (MT) of magnets per year for 10 years, equivalent to 70% of MP Material’s combined output. The DoD will use the magnets for defense needs but will also supply commercial markets.

Underlying this offtake agreement is the DoD’s commitment to purchase MP Materials’ NdPr oxide output at a guaranteed minimum price of US$110 per kg. The DoD will pay MP Materials the difference between US$110/kg and the market price. This floor price will extend to the NdPr content in all relevant products that MP Materials will manufacture, including the permanent magnets that the DoD will purchase.6

MP Materials hopes to benefit from the economies of scale and learning curve improvements that have eluded most other non-Chinese companies. The company expects its production costs for NdPr oxides to decline significantly to US$40/kg due to the state support.

The 10,000 tons of permanent magnets that MP Materials will eventually produce is equivalent to total US consumption of magnets in 2024. This does not include the 30,000 tons of magnets already installed in assembled products imported into the US.7US magnet demand is growing and would be much higher in any prolonged Great Power conflict.

Setting a powerful precedent 

Early messaging from the Trump Administration has assuaged concerns that the MP Materials deal will be an exclusive arrangement.

At a White House meeting in late July attended by permanent magnet manufacturers and recyclers, senior officials explicitly told attendees that the MP Materials deal was not "a one-off".

Making comparisons to the US efforts to rapidly develop Covid vaccines, officials said that the White House was working on an integrated strategy which would include more floor price agreements, protective tariffs, and efforts to encourage permanent magnet recycling.8

Days later, Australian Resources Minister Madeleine King strongly signaled that Canberra will follow suit in creating a floor price, building on the government’s recently announced rare earths stockpile.

Anecdotally, there are strong suggestions that European capitals are also considering similar measures. Industry watchers are predicting that the DoD’s floor price will give companies like Franco-Belgian Solvay more leverage in negotiating state support and offtake agreements.9

Herculean task

Western governments have come to a belated appreciation of the need for unorthodox measures to support an economically marginal yet critical industry.

That’s the easy part.

As yet, it is unclear whether the additional floor prices in the works in the US and elsewhere will crystallize into a formal ex-China alternative to the Asian Metals Index. The creation of a viable rival pricing platform would certainly make it much easier for suppliers and customers to navigate the global market.

Washington would be well advised to coordinate with allied and friendly governments to hone in on one area of the supply chain where China’s dominance is most pronounced.

Eventually, there will probably be enough NdPr oxide to meet Western magnet demand. The metallization of oxides, magnet production itself, as well as the mining and processing of heavy rare earths, present much thornier bottlenecks.

China’s rare earths dominance did not arise just because of subsidies, price distortion, and lax environmental standards.

Metallization and magnet production are highly complicated industrial processes that China has mastered over decades. Outside China and mostly Chinese-controlled companies in Vietnam, there is only a smattering of companies capable of producing rare earth metals.

To ramp up rare earth metal and magnet production, MP Materials was forced to scour the world to find non-Chinese machinery and engineers with relevant experience.10

Greater US cooperation with Japan and Korea will be important to fostering a broader industry ecosystem. Both countries account for the bulk of ex-China magnet production. Japan proposed transferring technology for permanent magnets in tariff talks with Trump, but it is unclear if this offer made it to the final deal.11

The single biggest obstacle is likely the lack of non-Chinese producers of heavy rare earths. Heavy rare earths, particularly dysprosium and terbium, are crucial to manufacturing high-performance permanent magnets capable of operating at high temperatures. Although there are companies trying to innovate around this problem, it remains relatively early days.

Until Lynas in May this year began separating heavy rare earths sourced from its Western Australian mine in Malaysia, there was no commercial-scale production of separated heavy rare earths outside China. The best geology for heavy rare earths is in China, Laos, and Myanmar, though there are several promising developments in Australia. Mountain Pass itself has limited economically recoverable heavy rare earth reserves.12

Up to 80,000 parts used in DoD systems are made with rare earths and critical minerals subject to Chinese export controls.13

Conclusion

This only underscores the necessity of a meticulous and coordinated allied approach to identify and resolve the most important pain points in Western supply chains.

China’s own actions will be another critical determinant. An unimpeded flow of magnets and rare earths could perversely disrupt diversification efforts by engendering complacency.

In the near term at least, assuming MP Materials can successfully scale up magnet production, the US will have made genuine progress in constraining one of China’s most potent geopolitical weapons. But that is a big assumption.

***
[1] Tkacik, "Magnequench: CFIUS and China's Thirst for U.S. Defense Technology", Heritage Foundation.
[2] Patey, "Mr. Magnet", The Wire.
[3] Hodgson & Johnson, "European companies look to France for domestic rare earths sector", Financial Times.
[4] Emont, "America’s War Machine Runs on Rare-Earth Magnets", Wall Street Journal.
[5] Ker, "Taxpayers make bet on rare earths green premium", Australian Financial Review.
[6] Staff writers, MP Materials deal explainer, Payne Institute.
[7] Onstad, "US rare earths pricing system", Reuters.
[8] Scheyder & Renshaw, "Exclusive: Trump administration to expand price support", Reuters.
[9] Op. cit., Onstad.
[10] Emont, "America’s Biggest Rare-Earth Producer Makes a Play", Wall Street Journal.
[11] Miki & Yamazaki, "Japan to propose China countermeasure package", Nikkei Asia.
[12] Op. cit., Payne Institute.
[13] Staff writers, "China is chocking supply of critical minerals", Wall Street Journal.


Ummm, unless I missed something, Socialism is when the government owns the capital...the means of production.


Now that you're invested, you may wanna listen in on this upcoming earnings report...

https://investors.mpmaterials.com/investor-news/news-details/2026/MP-Materials-Announces-Date-for-Fourth-Quarter-2025-Financial-Results-and-Webcast/default.aspx


Conference Call Details

Event: MP Materials Q4 2025 Financial Results Conference Call and Webcast
Date: Thursday, February 26, 2026
Time: 2:00 p.m. Pacific Time (5:00 p.m. Eastern Time)
Webcasthttps://investors.mpmaterials.com/ 
Replay: A webcast replay will be available approximately one hour after the call has concluded.



Tuesday, February 10, 2026

The Progression

Fewer meds. 

Remaining are:

50mcg fentanyl (patch) every 72 hours 

4mg tabs of hydromorphone (dilaudid) in green box w yellow label, prn. I've been getting by w 1/2 a tab now & then.

eye steroid used off-label for ear infection and in the difficult-to-open, square packages, ondansetron, for nausea (in white bowl),

also in white bowl: 5% triamcinoline cream for skin eruptions

and a languishing pepto-bismol left over from the last bout of free-floating nausea.

Decades ago t.p. replaced kleenex.

Each water bottle was good for one swig. Now that I'm down to one, or maybe two, they're awaiting attrition.

The rock, a gift from poet-nurse Jesicca, traveled from Navajo Lake where she likes to camp. It's, according to Chat, a basalt with vesicle infillings of calcite, zeolites, chalcedony or clay minerals (the light spots).




Then there's the remote for the space heater.

Leaping to the pile in the upper left...
on top is an interlibrary loan (I.L.L.) Aroused By Books by Anatole Broyard followed by Ageless Women, Timeless Wisdom (disappointing), Cholla Needles, a folder containing the history of Cumberland House Re-ed program and New Mexico Poetry anthology 2023.


OMG!! I forgot...I get 50mcg of fentanyl every 72 hours. (Thank you to JudithK for triggering yea olde memory.)



















Thursday, February 5, 2026

VC & Climate Tech

QUESTION POSED TO GOOGLE

I read an article that said venture capital (VC) is investing in climate change tech. The statistics showed they were investing in oil and gas.

ANSWER

It can appear contradictory, but your observation highlights a complex and often misunderstood aspect of climate finance. Venture capital (VC) is indeed investing heavily in climate tech, but significant portions of that funding involve, or are led by, the oil and gas industry.

This phenomenon, often called "energy transition investing" or "corporate venturing," is driven by a combination of diversification, compliance, and the need for new technologies to make legacy operations cleaner.



Image created by ChatGPT, inspired by Chagall


Here is why your statistics show a mix of climate tech and oil/gas:

1. "Big Oil" is a Major Investor in Climate Tech 
Oil and gas corporations have "corporate venture capital" (CVC) arms—such as Shell Technology Ventures, BP Ventures, and Chevron Technology Ventures—that invest heavily in low-carbon startups.

The Data: In 2022, over 20% of all VC climate tech deals had participation from major oil and gas players.

The Motive: These companies are diversifying away from pure fossil fuels and buying into technologies that may replace their core business (e.g., geothermal, hydrogen, advanced batteries). 

2. The Shift to "Transition Tech" (Not Just Renewables)
The definition of "climate tech" has expanded beyond just wind and solar. Many investors are focusing on technologies that help traditional energy industries reduce emissions—a space known as "transition technology" or "hard-to-abate" sector solutions.

Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS): Oil and gas companies are investing in startups that trap CO₂ before it enters the atmosphere.
Operational Efficiency: Technologies aimed at reducing flaring (burning waste gas) or reducing emissions during extraction.

3. The Need for "Heavy-Asset" Funding 
Climate technology often requires high capital expenditure and long development timelines (the "valley of death"). Oil and gas companies have the massive cash flow and industry infrastructure to scale these technologies, making them "ideal" partners in the eyes of many VC firms.

4. Continued Fossil Fuel Investment
While climate tech is growing, it is important to note that the oil and gas sector still invests in its own, traditional infrastructure. As demand for energy grows, some firms are boosting capital expenditure in natural gas and liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Summary of the Landscape
Overall Trend: Global investment in clean energy (renewable power, storage, EVs) is growing and is expected to outpace upstream oil and gas spending.

The Conflict: Much of the capital powering this "green" pivot comes from "brown" companies (fossil fuel producers), making the data appear as a mix of both worlds.

The Result: Investors are betting that oil giants will either use their capital to pivot entirely or that the technology to make fossil fuels cleaner will dominate in the short term. 


After Goya




                      ----------------------------------------

Monday, February 2, 2026

Steph Davis, Base-jumping & Wingsuits

Recently finished Steph Davis's memoir Learning To Fly. In it she describes her evolvement from climbing to skydiving to wingsuit flying and finally, base-jumping. 

Here she is at Castleton Tower.

Here I am at Castleton Tower.

Talking about Base-jumping.



20-min video about climbing & Base-jumping (at the end) w German subtitles.


Here's the wingsuit company.

Sunday, February 1, 2026

A Major Influencer

a16z comes up in lists of investors who think technology will save us. As an agnostic, I'm neither a doubter nor a believer, but, today, right now, we're looking at the results of a market economy and I'm not particularly inclined to accept the unbridled enthusiasms Mr. Andreesen espouses in the article below. But he's powerful...not like you and me.

https://a16z.com/the-techno-optimist-manifesto/


Also see:

https://www.exowatt.com/news





The "spotlight" on Exowatt's site

https://techcrunch.com/2025/11/13/sam-atlman-backed-exowatt-wants-to-power-ai-data-centers-with-billions-of-hot-rocks/





Friday, January 30, 2026

ZEPP Let Me Down


After sleeping all day, "recovery" (finally!) began around 5 pm.

After documenting the loss of ~ $650 on ZEPP, nearly half of the year's profits, I brought the trading amount up to $3200.00, sufficient to buy 50 shares of SOXL at my targeted price of $63.00.

Though making the decision to sell at a loss was discouraging, its minor effect on my mood showed how far I've come. 

This morning, we're talking 2 a.m. this morning, a couple of hours ago, as the effects of the fentanyl dose change from 25 to 75 mcg lifted, I reset the sails (deposited money into the Webull account) and after having slept through most of yesterday, hoped to get a few hours before the full trading day begins at 7:30 (pre-mkt begins at 2 a.m.).

Further!



End of day update:

ZEPP continued down and closed at $18.02. Had I held, I'd have lost $950.00.

After watching SOXL drop like a stone to $60.50, I decided to wait and see what Monday brings before buying.

Unfortunately, this is not a game I'm good at. But lying here, hour after day, it's entertaining.