Our friends at MetalMiner – also the authors of a white paper on building responsible manufacturing supply chains in the context of conflict minerals — held an event on May 6 in Chicago aimed at clearing up much of the confusion, which was another reason we thought May would be a good month to feature the “Three T’s” on our blog.

Post conference coverage is already available at www.agmetalminer.com and and Metal Miner’s partner site www.spendmatters.com, including discussion of Lawrence Heim’s (Director of The Elm Consulting Group International) presentation offering some practical strategies and approaches for conflict minerals compliance.

Friends of American Resources won’t be surprised to hear us suggest one possible alternative to the difficulties of conflict metals compliance: Development of at least tantalum and tungsten deposits in the U.S. would be a terrific way to help manufacturing companies go “conflict-free.”

The post Three Ts and related issues at MetalMiner’s Chicago conference earlier this month appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

MetalMiner found that in spite of new rules being in place, the import numbers for Tantalum from China look roughly the same today as they did before the August SEC action, indicating that there is a good chance the Tantalum industry “has found a way around the ruling,” as Grove suggests. The dollar value of Tantalum imports from China even peaked in January of 2013.

Commenting on the apparent stability of import levels, Grove pointed out to MetalMiner that companies don’t actually have to file their conflict mineral disclosures before May 2014. Continues MetalMiner’s post:

“And once tantalum ore moves to an oxide form, it becomes untraceable. The main exporters of oxide have likely stockpiled the processed oxide (ed. note: the tantalum supply chain tends toward stockpiling vs. JIT-type ordering) and have now secured conflict-free raw materials for ongoing operations. In other words, conflict materials have likely already converted to a processed oxide and have made their way to US firms. For the first reporting period, buying organizations will likely declare tantalum oxide ‘source undeterminable,’ whereas by the 2015 reporting period, most of the processed oxides will likely come from conflict-free sources.”

Meanwhile, Grove sees the January dollar value import peak as a sign that “the demand for Tantalum is increasing, which makes perfect sense considering the overall increasing demand for products themselves that need Tantalum for their design and performance,” which is all the more reason why U.S. stakeholders should keep Tantalum on their watch list.

The post Demand for Tantalum stays strong, while SEC conflict minerals rules don’t seem to affect import levels appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

As we have pointed out on numerous occasions, the United States has subjected itself to a significant degree of import dependency when it comes to the supply of critical minerals – a dependency that is in many cases homegrown and unnecessary. This over-reliance on foreign mineral sources comes with many strings attached, particularly when supplier nations fall into the category of those ranked only “partly free” or “not free” on various indices measuring freedom in the world.

The term “conflict minerals” has long entered the public discourse, but has really only “taken center stage for thousands of buying organizations across the United States” with the passage of the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial reform law and respective rules handed down by the SEC in 2012. Confusion relating to the requirements for companies to disclose whether they source conflict minerals – tantalum, tin, tungsten or gold – from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and its surrounding regions looms large.

Our friends at Metal Miner, who recently released a white paper on building responsible manufacturing supply chains in the context of conflict minerals, have organized an event for May 6 in Chicago aimed at providing interested parties “the opportunity to ask their most challenging questions of some of the industry’s most knowledgeable conflict minerals experts.”

To learn more about the event titled “Conflict Minerals EDGE,” click here.

The post MetalMiner to host event on conflict minerals in Chicago on May 6 appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

According to the National Mining Association, the US has $6.2 trillion dollars of mineral reserves, but it also has one of the slowest permitting processes in the world for new mines, running on average 7-10 years. As China’s influence swells, America’s dependence on foreign sources of supply becomes a greater cause for concern.

China’s New Policies

According to MetalMiner IndX(SM), the Rare Earths MMI®, a price index for Chinese Rare Earth metals fell 10 points since June 1, 2012 and 48 points since January of this year.

Source: MetalMiner IndX(SM)

This is attributable to falling domestic demand in China, and Beijing has made several policy changes within its rare earth manufacturing sector to stabilize prices. These reforms will place additional pressure on the U.S. and all other countries that rely on China for rare earths.

The first announcement came approximately 45 days ago, indicating that China would begin stockpiling rare earth metals. China has successfully moved global markets for a range of metals through stockpiling, particularly when it comes to copper and zinc. China’s copper stockpile (1.9 million metric tons) is more than the U.S. consumes in an entire year.

Copper is an extremely valuable metal due to its extensive security, technology and energy applications. It is the second-most used material by the U.S. Department of Defense. Copper is also the primary mineral for other critical and strategic minerals, such as Molybdenum, Rhenium, Tellurium, and Selenium. China’s stockpiling has reduced the availability of global supply, boosting demand and the price in turn.

According to intelligence group Stratfor, citing China National Radio and Xinhua, Chinese authorities have set a minimum production threshold on rare earth producers which will have the effect of reducing output by 20 percent. The Stratfor report also quoted a Chinese ministry official as saying the new thresholds may shut down one-third of rare earth mining operators and potentially half of smelting and metallurgy businesses involved in the rare earth mining sector. This strategy will further shore up prices and demonstrate China’s market power when it comes to rare earth metals.

Finally, China has just announced it will begin publishing a rare earth metal price index, ostensibly to create greater visibility into price trends for these metals (though how this index will benefit Chinese producers remains unclear).

U.S. Manufacturing Needs Smart Minerals and Metals Policies

These developments underscore the near stranglehold China has on the global supply of rare earth metals. When China keeps the price of these raw materials high, it increases costs for US manufacturers and hampers our economy, from the national down to the local level. Players in key manufacturing states, such as Wisconsin, are looking for smarter regulations and policies that allow the minerals and metals industry to give American manufacturing the boost it needs.

During a recent manufacturing summit in Milwaukee, hosted by the Metal Service Center Institute, its President and CEO Bob Weidner hosted a panel made up of executives from several metal companies including executives from Brillion-based Ariens Company, Chicago-based Lapham-Hickey Steel Corp., Dalco Metals Inc. of Walworth, Nucor and Bucyrus International. The panel addressed questions around policies that would boost job creation and improve manufacturing prospects for the US. The most frequent answers, as quoted from The Business Journal, included “simplifying and reducing taxes, less strict regulations that still protect the environment, developing a national energy policy, enforcing international trade laws with China and passing a federal debt plan so the country doesn’t go the way of Greece.”

Job creation goes hand in hand with sound government policy. Ironically, some of these manufacturing policies require little to no money to implement (e.g. streamlining the permitting process does not require new government expenditures) but they take coordinated action and a willing executive and legislative branch to implement.

The post China Tinkers With Rare Earth Policy While U.S. Delays Critical Mining Projects appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

Indeed, there are a number of similarities between both metal markets, which Reisman lists as follows:

· Both share significant supply constraints, forcing sourcing managers to devise supply- and commodity risk management strategies.
· Both come primarily from China.
· Both have seen price drops as a result of restrictive public policies.

CEO of junior miner American Manganese Larry Reaugh’s conclusion (based on a study conducted by the CPM Group) that China may well become a net importer of Manganese by 2018 as shutdowns for smaller plants along with other factors will drive cost up, also sounds familiar to those keeping a close eye on the Rare Earths.

American Manganese will likely begin operations at its project site in Arizona, for which it has filed a preliminary feasibility report, by 2015, thus helping to reduce the United States’ near-total reliance for Manganese from China. However, whether twin brother or ugly stepchild – the U.S. should take steps to this end on the policy level, as well. Reisman lists several elements that would go far in meeting this challenge for all critical metals and minerals:

“Enactment of US legislation and coordination among government agencies elevating the status of the 43 minerals listed in a recent ARPN report, requiring the development of complete supply chain risk management strategies for each and every mineral;

• Streamlining the US mining permitting process, currently the longest in the world;
• The establishment of public-private partnerships in which industry works with the DOD and other national security agencies to devise strategies and tactics to secure supply of key materials, and
• Strict enforcement of rules-based trade, among several others.”

Some in Congress have received the message – but whether this will result in actual policy changes remains to be seen.

The post Two of a kind? Manganese and Rare Earths appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

Gareth Hatch is a founding principal of Technology Metals Research, LLC.  An authority in the area of REEs and other critical and strategic materials, Hatch is also the founding editor of Terra Magnetica and an editor at RareMetalBlog, a fantastic blog that keeps readers up-to-date on new developments in the REE world.  We have highlighted some of his work here and here, and will be sharing his new research paper through our website in the near future.

Lisa Reisman is co-founder and editor of the highly acclaimed metals website MetalMiner^TM, the largest metals publication in the U.S. with a monthly readership of 36,000.  Covering a range of topics from REEs and precious metals to international trade policy, she has appeared on programs for BBC Radio, NPR, MSNBC and FoxBusiness.com.  We’ve highlighted some of her writing for MetalMiner^TM, a website you should bookmark, here.

To learn more about their work, and our other panelists, visit our experts page.

The post Meet our experts: Gareth Hatch and Lisa Reisman appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.

At the end of the day, according to Green, US public policy should focus on only two initiatives:

1. Define what we are short of
2. Determine how we get it

It’s hard to argue with that. But with some estimates of the time needed to rebuild a rare-earth supply chain of 15 years, and a minimum of two years to create magnet facilities for sintered neodymium iron boron permanent magnets, Congress had better start acting soon.

The post ARPN Expert Commentary: Congressional Action on REE Policy is Needed appeared first on American Resources Policy Network.