Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Lots podcast.
I'm Jill Wisenthal and I'm Tracy Alloway.
Tracy, you know, we do these episodes on various areas of technology in which China is perceived to be ahead of the US. Very interesting and I learn a lot. It's not obvious to be like, what lessons there are or anything some of these things like we're really far behind. I don't think we're ever going to catch up. This is very interesting and academic. But what exactly is the point of talking about all this? I don't know if there's anything to do with this information.
You know, what I thought you were going to say is that we are sometimes accused of identifying strategic choke points or areas of difficulty on the podcast and then coming up with absolutely no solutions for how to fix them.
I will be the first to admit I have no solutions. If someone accuses me of saying you have not offered any solutions, you know what, I just say, that's not my job. I'm just a mere podcaster. I'm just asking questions.
We enunciate the problem and leave it to others. To figure out.
We leave it, We leave the problem to others to figure out. But there are people who are doing more than identifying choke points. There are people who are identifying areas and vulnerabilities, et cetera. So people actually are thinking about solutions, and they're not all pie in the sky. You know, I've seen people on Twitter it's like, oh, I know how to be more like Chinese? And you know, why do we just adopt to.
Be more You've seen people on Twitter how to be more Chinese? They're Chinese, Joe Wise.
They're just saying, why do you why doesn't the US just adopt Marxist Leninism with Chinese characteristics? It's right, that's well, no, and then we can do.
This on a serious note. The one you see most often is well, why doesn't the US just ease up on some of its regulation like China in order to get things done quickly?
That's the true Spend more money or something like that, encourage actors to pursue things that aren't necessarily so short term, et cetera. Yes, there are in theory solutions. Anyway, let's have a conversation which we actually talk about ideas that may be somewhere in the realm of.
Feasible excellent, I'm ready. And this is also this is not an interesting topic that's come up a number of times on all thoughts at this point.
That's right, So we're going to be talking about a very core topic. And of course, this is the US vulnerability to strategic minerals where earths et cetera, which we know that China dominates, which in theory of China word to completely shut off access you know, nadget military, high tech, et cetera, all kinds of problems. What could actually be done to alleviate is vulnerability.
And China's dominance was also a crucial turning point in the trade negotiations with the US. And also I think you got a sense of I don't want to say desperation on the US side, but like maybe urgency on the US side, just by looking at the headlines that seem to come out on a nearly daily basis about like, oh, we found a huge critical mineral deposit in Utah, so you know, we're all saved.
It's also worth before we go further, this is an area in which there's probably a decent amount of overlap from the last administration to this one. We did an episode a little while ago with Peter Harrell who talked about some of these deals that the administration is making with equity stakes and private companies. I think Vulcan came up as one of them. And so yes, we're going to be talking about what we're further we can go in terms of actually having a healthy, robust domestic environment
for our own strategic commodities, et cetera. Anyway, we really do have the perfect guest. We're going to be speaking with, Heidi Krebohticker. She's a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, a former chief economist at the State Department, and she is the co author of a brand new report for the CFR looking at exactly this question, what can the US do in this room? So, Heidi, thank you so much for coming on the Odd Lots podcast.
Thanks for having me on.
Tell us what's this new report all about.
You're right that everyone's identified the problem and that it's been a long time coming. This is like a slow train coming at us for decades. At this point, it's not a surprise that China has dominated this market for a variety of reasons. And it's not a surprise that they've weaponized it. They've done it over the years. We did pay attention, but we forgot about it in many ways. But right now we have an inflection point where we really need to get this sort of damicles off of
the United States. And actually our challenge is the same challenge that a lot of other advanced economies have right now with this incredible choke hold not just on critical minerals, but particularly rare earth, particularly heavy rare earths that are the foundation of magnets which go in everything.
Can I just back up in history for a second, because I think it will help us contextualize where we are right now. But what were the conditions that allowed China to basically gain dominance in this particular area. Did they make us strategic to decision at some point saying, you know, we're going to be the world's uh not manufacturer of min of rare minerals and rare earths, but we're gonna we're gonna make this, you know, a priority for ourselves.
Yes, made in twenty twenty five was their big strategic plan.
They had invested a lot in rare earths, you know, particularly their domestic rare earths many many years before that, but they decided they wanted to dominate, and they really they did a very smart job of creating an entire ecosystem, so both domestic China extraction processing, and then they came up with the all of the products that were that would be the leading demand, which you really need to have for the creation of a market, and the demand
meaning the you know, new energy wind turbines, particularly their you know, their evs and also defense, so you have a whole like demand pull, and you also have state companies that don't have to be profitable, and that's pretty key if you're competing around the globe to actually mine
and process. They also have a low hold on the technology for processing, and so in traditional mining, you know, they have really they've made a massive strategic investment, and we, for a variety of reasons, did not.
Joe. This reminds me of the episode we did with Dan Wong where he made sort of similar points about the tech ecosystem that's developed around shen Zen and how that allows innovation to really thrive. And then also this idea that well, if you don't necessarily care about returns on capital as much as the US. Certainly, then you kind of have a leg up when you're developing something like this that might not pay off for a very long time.
And this always seems to be an issue when we're talking about matters of national defense, because right when it comes to national security, you have this other priority that is not profit related. Everything that we've done, every episode we've talked about this comes up with we're talking about literally the defense industries and the defense suppliers or other strategic things. Here's this other goal that you have in which you have at least two bottom lines, ones related
to security and ones related to profit. And so you have this tension. So how did you How did you do this report? What was the process by which you researched this, Who did you talk to, et cetera so that you could ut publish this.
The report itself is on how while we put all of the emphasis on mining, on the extraction, coming up with the processing and the end products, for example, magnets. The thing is we can't actually outline, out process and outspend China, certainly not at scale and not in a
cost effective way. So what is another we have basically a huge timing mismatch will we get there eventually with friends, allies, you know, all of the different countries that are working on the same problem together eventually, but it's going to take a very long time, and we don't really have time. So we looked at how innovation could actually leap frog that China choke hold on critical minerals and particularly rare earths.
And so that was really the starting point. How do you solve for national and economic security in a way that really plays to us strength in innovation. And then when we took a look around, we found there were some really exciting companies that had taken research and development from like fifteen years ago and they were ready to scale and starting to scale. And so that was really what the excitement was about.
Just real quickly, when you say you took a look around, like who did you talk to and how did you identify the people who pointed to you to look, there's a lot of interesting, genuine science and tech that can be scaled up. How did that process work?
So I started with the National Labs because we don't give enough credit to the fact that a lot of the great innovations that come out and are commercialized that we all know and love actually had their origin in our national lab system. It's sort of a national jewel, and so AIMES National Lab has this critical material innovation hub and a lot of the Companyanese that are doing the various types of breakthrough technology came out of or
are working with Aimes National Lab. And so I started like poking around from there and then really word of mouth as soon as we got the word out that we were working on this. It's a very enthusiastic mission driven community that wants to all leap frog this challenge through innovation.
Plus people like talking about their problems. Right, describe for us the state of the US, I guess Rare Earth's industry at the moment, and then also what you would describe as the key choke point in this particular strategic choke point, like where is the biggest source of trouble or inability to actually do this at scale.
So, in terms of the two different parts, the US used to produce a significant amount of wearors, primarily light rearers MP materials in Mountain Pass Mine had a variety of challenges including not being commercially viable, but that was not the only reason. But we do actually have Rare Earth's in the United States, and we were a mining you know, a mining powerhouse many years ago. I mean remember like California forty nine ers and people going out with picks and shovels.
Yea, many many years, many years ago.
So we do have mines and we have resources, but there are always you know, there are always consequences and trade offs there. You know, to mine is often toxic, you have environmental concerns, You have a lot of waste that through traditional mining gets generated. So we were more than happy for the Chinese to take on those set of problems and then sell them to us at a very low cost. That's how we all became dependent on them.
And I think where we are right now, we do have a lot of partnerships that are being formed, and you know with Saudi, with South Korea, are Australia. I mean, we're doing what we can to go the traditional mining route. But the I think the really interesting thing is how we can get there like much faster, much cleaner, and with much more cost effectiveness and even competitiveness cost competitiveness with China through some of these new technologies mining in the US.
Let's talk about them. When you talk about the technologies that could actually get us to parity or something like that. Are they more on the mining side, are they more on the refining side or both? Like, let's talk about these technologies.
Okay, So let me give you. Let me give you a couple of examples. So back when China cut off Japan's rare earth access in twenty ten, the Department of Energy, I mean, people don't know ARPA E. Generally they think of darp But Department of Energy has its own research grant facility and they do big problems and put them
out there. So they did this in twenty eleven. They sprinkled around a lot of grant research funding for materials that you could create a magnet with that did not require rare earth, and lo and behold that a scientist in Minnesota, University of Minnesota created a rare earth free magnet. So there's a material design approach to this that either drastically reduces how much rare earth you actually need in magnets.
And there's a company called Nirn Magnetics that actually is it's commercialized, it's scaling, it actually is scaling up massively a new facility in Minnesota. So that's sort of the material engineering approach to it, and then there's this whole other basket of bio tech innovations and you know, if you want me to go into this please yeah, okay. So you know they're companies like Alterra Research Technology and they again are affiliated with this AIMS National Lab. They
have programmed proteins. So those proteins are basically like robots that go in to waste. And I'll get to the importance of waste in a minute, but they will go into waste or other types of tailings, things that come out of minds, and they will go in and specifically target the protein, will target a specific rare earth and extract it. And so it is clean, it's fast, it relies on a very large resource that we have. We have a lot of waste, so you know, it's a
domestically sourced resource. There are a number of other, you know, ways that we are very in a very clean, fast and cost competitive way using technology to actually mine waste. And that's actually one of our It's like, we shouldn't consider waste at this point to be a liability. It's literally America's next mind.
So I have a serious question. But first, no, first I'm so curious about the little protein robots. What does that process actually look like?
So I don't know. I'm not a molecular you know, technologist, and.
Molecular technologists they're listening. That'll be the follow up episode.
But this is something that's been again long in the making in terms of the tech that's been developed, and so it's basically you know that this particular company is commercializing the technology, but it is. It's a protein that is altered so that it can go in and sort of micro target specific rare earth elements, and that is
I think it's kind of revolutionary. It's super disruptive. And the same with all of these companies that were part of this study that we did, they are at the cusp of being ready to scale and scale fast.
All right, this is my next serious question, which is, you know, all of this sounds great. Protein robots sounds amazing. Why aren't we doing this already? If the technology exists?
So we're focused on and this is you know, this takes a strategy, and a strategy that focuses on the innovation side. We're very focused on the how do we compete head on with traditional mining? And that's good and it's important. This is a huge compliment to that. We haven't really done it yet. We've done it piecemeal. So you have a lot of a lot of people in this community that are highly focused on the technology commercializing at early stage and then figuring out how to go
from there. I think we have Again, it's a huge opportunity that's out there. When I think about where we are, I think about the shale revolution and how we had fracking technology for decades and then we reached a point where that technology unlocked and energy revolution in the United States, and it was like an overnight switch flipped and suddenly
we're an energy giant, an energy producing giant. And so I do feel there's something similar in what we're seeing right now in the technology around critical minerals and mirrors.
I think we could really use a big switch flip to suddenly have abundance. Those don't come along very often. We should people have to appreciate that more. I'm reading this press release from Berkeley. As reported in Nano Letters, the researchers genetically engineered a harmless virus to act like a quote smart sponge that grabs rare earth metals from water and with a gentle change in temperature in acidity releases them for collection. Sounds really cool. I'll have to
go watch your YouTube later talk to us about. One of the themes that comes up in a lot of these conversations is the importance of off take agreements. So right like right now, American companies, they currently do have access to Chinese where Earth's and so it might be very risky for anyone to invest in these technologies knowing that at least for the very you know, the beginning years, when before the cost curve has come down, the competitors might be.
Cheaper the proverbial valley of death.
Yeah, how do you solve that problem of guaranteeing that there is demand when these companies release harmless viruses that act like a smart sponge and rare earth metals from water.
So first there has to be This is not just on government to do. I mean a lot of people point at the massive, very muscular industrial policy that the Trump administration is using right now, and I think that is a very good thing. But it also it takes companies actually coming together more in a consortia type of
arrangement to have collective off take agreements. You have certain companies that have been very forward leaning in their off take agreements with certain I mean, Nyron is a good case that they have some autooems that have been working with them for years.
Now.
You have I mean Vulcan you brought up earlier, but Vulcan is kind of the poster child for when you get the technology, the industrial policy, and the commercial all together working to solve and they actually are. I think they're the first innovation targeted industrial policy scale up rapid scale up. Vulcan's only three years old. They close their Series A in August. I mean we're talking about one point four billion that they got in a CONSORTIU together
with a company called re Element that recycles magnets. They take the rare earths and they actually manufacture magnets. That is incredibly interesting. They do it on it. They're doing it on a a super fast scaling time horizon. I think they are aiming for twenty twenty seven to start rolling product out and have been going through the validation process with all of their different types of magnets, so
they're doing this on an accelerated basis. They got funded by every branch in the military, so they have a built in supply a demand from the US military right there. They also have semiconductor and an aerospace. They're really looking to target the national security and the top economic security challenges and they have the partners to do that. So I think that's a good example of how we want to do.
This moving forward. Adjacent to the off take issue, who actually owns the waste water that we could potentially be you know, extracting valuable things from.
So we have lots of different types of waste. So we have industrial waste that comes from mines where you have primary metals that are that are extracted, but you have the piles of tailings that sit there on the side because they're either there's no commercial viability to extract them or they are you know, they're just considered they're considered piles of waste. Both in operating mines and in minds that have closed down. You have coal ash that
is toxic leftover waste from coal mining. You have e waste, which is I think one of the more promising areas we Actually if you look at old hard drive and cell phones and batteries and the like, there are tons of rare earths that are in there and actually magnets that are in there from years you know, when we actually had much greater rare earth's you know, intensity in those magnets before we started to like having to have to scale back. So if you look at the waste ecosystem,
we have a lot of domestic opportunity. And that's actually why I think Bulkan is a really good example. They pull from domestic recycled e waste and then they process and manufacture magnets in a completely domestic cycle.
Joe, that's interesting about coal ash. I could have been mining my ashes from burning the coal stove in Connecticut that first year, mining them for rare earths if only I had.
None at another missed opportunity to exploit.
To monetize my natural resource.
To monetize the natural resources on your land that you had in Connecticut. Let's talk about Okay, so we understand there's various measures and opportunities and resources and technological opportunities and things that we're going to allow because that are
already us scaling up, et cetera. Talk to us more like from a policy perspective, what do we need to do to get from what we already have cooking and what's already in the works to where we feel good about where we are and from does policy what it needs to happen in the form of legislation, or does the government the federal government as currently constituted, have the cash and the policy levers to pull without new laws being passed.
So policy plays an enormous role. And the first thing we need to do is actually understand that we can't do a fragmented approach to this because you end up losing innovation that might actually change the chessboard entirely. With China, you also have to deal with waste from a policy basis, because we actually don't track waste. It's very hard to find data on how much e waste the US pretty uses. We ship some of it to Asia that is very
likely fed back into China's massive recycling machine. We shouldn't be exporting if you consider this as America's next mind. There are ways to address policy that can provide the data, maybe restrict the exports till we know exactly what value is hidden inside all of the stuff that we're exporting, and then come up with a whole a whole strategy
that is a critical minerals innovation strategy. That sits alongside our other critical minerals strategy and develop that through not only the policy tools around waste, but also financial tools. Where are the values of death? Where do we find them? How can we solve them? How can we use government as a poll to get companies together in consortia to actually have those off take agreements early on and also work with the material engineers to design what they're going
to need earlier on in the process. They're like, there are a lot of ways to do this. One of the big takeaways is that there is a specific equity value of death that a venture like entity could help solve this for because you don't have the venture outside of some really big frontier you know, risk takers that will invest in difficult technology. So I think having some kind of a counter that we have now in the
you know, in the instruments the d D has. You know, we have a whole range of different agencies that have all loan based they're almost all loan based instruments, and that's not what this is. These are tech companies and they really can't sustain debt. They're not there. You need to have that VC come in early on and help them through various series of fundraising, partner with others, bring in other parts like private vcs throughout the process, and we need to and we do have one of those
right now that is INQTEL. It is not technically I don't know if you've heard of Intel, but it is okay, very good. They are. Actually they recognized this gap in the capital structure and the actual ability for these breakthrough technologies to fundraise, and so they actually created a separate fund within in QTEL called their Compass Fund. And they're
not it's not just the CIA, They're a nonprofit. They worked sort of across the intelligence agencies and they've grown over the past twenty five years from what they started out, which was really a very like a boutique VC for specific solving specific problems for the intelligence world. So they have invested in actually going back to one of your earlier questions, how did I find these companies? Well, it
ends up that they have invested. They invested in two companies that I had found through Aims National Lab and so I think they were extremely helpful in thinking through what the gaps actually were, and we really nailed this early stage VC needing to come from government. It's a market failure. Until we have solved for that market failure, these will just lie on the shelf.
Inktel has one mission to be the most sophisticated source of strategic technical knowledge and capabilities to the US government and its allies. That's through capital. That's an interesting one, an episode on we should for sure. Okay, So since we're talking about the CIA and you brought up the military earlier, this is going to be a natural segue.
I promise you bring up a historical analogy in your paper, a previous choke point that was militarily, very very significant for the US at a very very historical time, which we actually managed to solve through industrial policy. How much relevance does that particular analogy have to our current situation.
Well, I love this analogy because as we were contemplating entering World War Two, the Japanese cut off the supply chain for natural rubber in Southeast Asia, and we were dependent on this flow for ninety percent of our rubber, right.
And we can't go through rubber trees.
Rubber came from Southeast Asia for a reason. And what we did was we actually we took technology, synthetic rubber technology, and we scaled it like crazy, so we actually were able to provide for you know, for trucks and tanks and everything that rubber goes into that we had never even thought about but until it was gone, and we were not able to actually enter World War two without the ability to provide something in replacing that rubber supply. And so we did it both through a rapid warp
speed Manhattan Project. I mean, we think of Manhattan Project for the atomic bomb. But at the same time I think there's a good case to be made that without synthetic rubber, we would not have won World War Two. The other side of that was that we did a huge you know, all of the population should check in their extra rubber tires and their raincoats and their garden hoses and whatever you could for the war effort, so that we could actually use and recycle rubber that we
had already here. So it's a too pronged I think the analogy that works.
There are some great like posters from World War two about recycling your tires and things like that, nice graphic design.
I have boxes of like old iPhones and stuff that randomly, I bet I have ten lap ten old laptops and Ringdom stuff.
And the way that I mean, the way that the cycles of like upgrades happen. I mean, everybody has tons of like old laptops where the software doesn't work anymore, and so this is actually a huge opportunity. So we could actually make it a national priority. And there are ways to do that through government incentive, you know, you can there are ways that companies can do that through paying for old you know, old unused, unusable technologies and
then have maybe get a government credit. There are like a lot of ways you can be creative about getting this this entire system to rev up.
You mentioned warp speed just then, and so you know, the obvious thing that comes to mind is also the COVID vaccination efforts. Can these types of programs exist without a coinciding national emergency to galvanize everyone into action. And I totally take it that competing with China is one of those rare areas of bipartisan agreement nowadays. But at the same time, shortages potential choke points in rare Earth's has been a long running issue. We've been aware of
it for a while. So far, we haven't really done that much. What's going to galvanize people now and really lend this whole effort a sense of urgency.
So I think we actually do have a national emergency. And certainly, you know, policy makers and companies understand that when China shut off.
Access and so you that was the moment.
I think that was the moment where it really hit that not only over reliance, but up to one hundred percent reliance. That's like that. I mean, the Chinese cut off access to the technology that they had developed for refining, for extracting. They actually when we had that one year pause, one of the things that the Council on for relations partner Silverado Policy Accelerator, they had done a lot of work on what China was actually exporting after that October
lifting of the of the export controls. They're exporting magnets, but they're not exporting those rare earths or the technology that we need to actually produce the same for ourselves.
Yeah, it's interesting that like they won't export the rare earth, they'll export the finish material, which.
Is the component.
Yeah.
Yeah, well you want to you want to climb the value chain, yeah, right and away the low margency. You know, I mentioned it seems like there is some continuity on some of this stuff from the last administration to this one.
When you're in DC talking to people, do you sent from the on the policy side or on the government side, do you feel that there is a sort of intensity and focus, Because again, when you you know, you go back to World War Two, one thing I associate with that time is just an incredible amount of like focus on solving specific things in coordination. Do you sense that that exists?
So just as with World War Two, there were there were a lot of officials flagging the fact that we were over dependent on single sources or the toe point was the shipping lanes, and there's a huge parallel here. During the bid deministration, one of the first things during the first hundred days the Biden administration did it resilience study and basically looked at where the choke points were.
This was after COVID, It was looking at pharmaceuticals, it was looking but one of the big takeaways was that we were so overdependent on China for rare earth and critical materials, critical minerals, that we had to do something asap.
The Trump administration and Trump one also understood that we had this huge vulnerability and critical minerals, and they had they passed it, you know, a number of executive orders and tried to get the whole process started for mining permitting, you know, reducing permitting times, environmental you know, restrictions and timelines. But it's again, it's a it's a complete parallel with what happened in the run up to World War Two.
We actually have seen this coming for a very long time, and it wasn't until China shut off the access that it that the US and Europe kind of woke up to the fact that this is a big problem.
You know, one thing you mentioned the national labs. They're under threat, right, I mean, like you talked about them as being this important crown jewel of the US economy, US industry. All these stories about funding cuts, et cetera. What is the intersection there, And from your perspective anyway, are we undercutting our own efforts through some of these budgetary choices.
Absolutely, I mean this is something that we do really really well. The whole world looks at the way that DARPA and ARPA E and the national labs that are associated are actually like huge innovation engines. Often it's a matter of people coming in entrepreneurs coming in and understanding what the applications of the science can be to commercialize it.
But this is exactly the time where we have to double down on the innovation and the investment in R and D that is not only in the national labs, but also universities, because that's where this is coming from as well. Nyron's you know, breakthrough came from University of Minnesota, So I think, you know, you want to make sure that right now, in this particular moment, the solutions can
come from biotech as opposed to mining tech. You don't want to be cutting off any channels of investment in R and D right now.
How often do you hear people in DC talk about the potential for capital misallocation when it comes to rare earth or is the idea of I guess Cylindro with magnets, is that not as much of a looming concern given the urgency of the problem.
I think that the demonization of risk taken on Cleindra has really plagued us for a long time. We have to be much more ready to take risk and be like hold hands on a bi partisan basis and realize that this is a big moment where we have to actually take more risk.
So I do love all the analogies we've used in this conversation. So obviously synthetic rubber, but you mentioned fracking before, and a lot of people will conceide that fracking was incredibly crucial to America's economic well being nowadays and we've become an energy exporter. But at the same time, there's an externality, a negative externality associated with fracking, which is environmental damage, and there's a lot of concern and also
controversy about how much impact that actually has. What are the trade offs that the US would have to think about as we encourage more of a domestic rare earth industry.
So again, there are trade offs, and I think one of the you know, I'm going to pivot back to the innovation because I think one of the ways we can do this in a clean way is through some of these new technologies you were talking about, and they're you know, the so Rio Tinto is using a proprietary new microbe that they have that they've just started utilizing in some of their old minds in Arizona where they didn't have the ability to economically extract copper but using microbes,
they are able in a clean way to use a biotech solution to actually extract copper on a cost competitive basis that they were not able to extract. And they're rolling this out right now, they'll be doing it in the months ahead. And I think it's really noteworthy that that you have, you know, a large mining company that is taking a plunge into a biotech solution to how to unlock value that they thought the mind was basically, you know, it was closed. So we can do that
in a way that is clean. We can do it in a way that's fast and cost competitive, and so I think that there are ways to do that using innovation. I think we need to be very mindful of that because mining and refining our dirty businesses. That's just that's life. And if we can do them, if we do them in a cleaner way, then that is a much more sustainable way to actually have, you know, have an industry moving forward that actually suits the national interest.
We did that Biotech VC episode so much interesting biotech stuff that I never really thought.
About that I never thought.
Much more to do on learning about some of the science. Howd Kribohdicker, thank you so much for coming on odd laws, fascinating report. Encourage everyone to go read it and check it out or actually some ideas out there, not just people identifying problems.
That was great, Thank you so much.
Great to be with you, Cracy.
Want to learn more about industrial biotech, Yeah, I mean we mentioned it during the conversation, but I feel like there could be tons of interesting episodes on the crossover of so that sort of natural science and mining and stuff like that.
Well, I'm looking at a page on Rio Tinto's website right now, and the title is Life finds Away Microbes, and then it says while dinosaurs vanish their tiny companions, microbes adapted and thrived, proving their resilience over time, and now they can be used as some of our most groundbreaking advancements in mining.
So that's pretty cool.
Yeah, it's exciting.
Let's let's get a sciencest or something on there. I talk about microboscience.
I kind of want to see how all of this works, But of course you can't actually see the microbes, so I'll just have to think about it.
Just imagine you've got to be YouTube. At least we could go on the road to some mine. Right, I'm sure, and like water just looked like no. But I thought that was really interesting. I guess I thought, you know, in my mind when I think about some of the when I thought about the rare Earth's challenge before, I sort of assumed I suppose that, Okay, the US probably could overcome our industrial reliance at the cost of a lot of money. It caught basically a lot of loss
making investment, because again that's the nature of defense. National security is Okay, you just say, have to sometimes spend money, et cetera. So it's interesting the prospect that there are technologies that not only could solve perhaps the sort of strategic element, but that actually could be cost competitive, perhaps could create export opportunities, could perhaps also be for provid That's very interesting and I hadn't really appreciated that prior to Heidi's report.
Yeah, I think the overall thrust of the report this idea of like, Okay, you're not going to beat China necessarily on its own territory. You're certainly not going to beat them in the same way that China has developed this industry by you know, basically ignoring a lot of environmental concerns and things like that. So you have to turn to the US's own competitive advantage, which is research
and developed. Yeah, and also like huge amounts of government capital, which you know, sometimes we have an issue deploying, sometimes we don't. It was super interesting that Heidi described, you know, the recent cutting off of China's rare earths as like the moment where people have really realized this is an issue, and so there is a potential to actually galvanize some action.
I have no doubt in my mind that the US has the sort of capacity we know how be science, the natural resources, the money, et cetera, to do it. The only question, of course, whether we have the sort of organizational capacity. And of course, you know, the the National Research Labs are sort of the prime example of the concern here is the site with liter a lot of these innovations come from. There's this widespread acknowledgment that this is a very serious thing, and apparently you know,
they're seeing their budgets impaired. At the same time, Can everyone get on the same page. Can we prioritize things, Can we say that we want to move in concert or do you just have these like say, political fights and these various factions et cetera. They are not coordinated, they're not on the same page. They are working at cross purposes. That remain my main source of concern. But I would say, perhaps to your point, maybe there has been some galvanization and maybe there are some paths here.
Wow, I'm still in this Rio Tinto side. Yeah, it's great. It's they keep making references to Jurassic Park, which is not something I expected from Rio Tinto. But anyway, shall we leave it there.
Let's leave it there, all right?
This has been another episode of the Odd Lots podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway. You can follow me at Tracy Alloway.
And I'm Joe Wisenthal. You can follow me at the Stalwart. Follow our producers Common Rodriguez at Carmen armand dash Ol Bennett at Dashbod and Keil Brooks at Keil Brooks. From well Odd Lodge content. Go to Bloomberg dot com flash Odd Lots for the daily newsletter and all of our episodes, and you can chat about all of these topics. Twenty four so, I mean in our discord discord gg slash odlines and if.
You enjoy Odd Lots, if you want us to go on a microbe mining tour, then please leave us a positive on your favorite podcast platform. And remember, if you are a Bloomberg subscriber, you can listen to all of our episodes absolutely ad free. All you need to do is find the Bloomberg channel on Apple Podcasts and follow the instructions there. Thanks for listening.