alt Hacker NewsHow can ‘seperation’ possibly be of bigger concern than the ‘mining’ if you consider the real-life impact?
It’s the mining that people don’t want in their backyard because of the inherent environmental devastation. Especially considering the low density at which they occur. And the radioactive pollution!
Also, the same old chemical seperation process used with other minerals also works with the rare earth ones. If you’re talking about that being a challenge, it’s not even rare earth specific. So why market it as such!
Furthermore, in what world is mining a start-up friendly industry? Wouldn’t this naturally be done by the giant mining conglomerates that, in fact, are doing so right now?
Replies
excannuk • today at 1:08 AM
[dead]
It's not much worse than any other form of mining. Rare earth mining is destructive because mining is destructive and you need lots of ore to produce viable amounts of rare earth minerals. The "separation" aspect that GP is talking about is hard because of that: you need lots of input to produce not much output. (There is a chemical aspect as well; because rare earths all occupy one spot on the periodic table, they are different to separate from each other). But other than that, it's not worse than say coal or tin mining.
Also rare earths (other than promethium) are not themselves radioactive, they just tend to co-occur with uranium and thorium deposits. This is akin to your house having a radon problem though: doesn't mean your house is radioactive, just that you built it on a uranium deposit.