Tag: graphite

Trump’s tariffs signal ‘new sheriff in town’ to China

When President Trump imposed tariffs in February, his decision was not received well by either the Chinese government or some in the Democrat party.

From CFACT

By Craig Rucker

When President Trump imposed tariffs in February, his decision was not received well by either the Chinese government or some in the Democrat party.

“This is not ‘America First,’” U.S. Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-Detroit) wrote on X. “Tariffs are bad for business.”

“If war is what the U.S. wants, be it a tariff war, a trade war or any other type of war, we’re ready to fight till the end,” proclaimed China’s embassy to the United States, also on X.

Such rants, I suppose, should not be unexpected. Fortunately, they will not likely deter this President. Nor should they.

The Chinese Communist Party is challenging the United States on many fronts, including militarily in the Pacific Ocean over Taiwan and control of what should be international shipping lanes. Little known to many, however, is that the Chinese government is also waging another campaign – on energy, transportation and environmental fronts – to also weaken our nation.

This can be seen, for example, in China’s near monopoly over the mining and processing of graphite, rare earth elements, cobalt, and other metals and minerals that are vital to our economic interests. It does this while still building 40-50 new coal-fired power plants annually for its own use.

China recently blocked exports of rare earths that have US military and civilian applications. It signaled it would do the same for additional commodities in the event of future tensions or conflicts.

The CCP uses its monopolies, low-cost energy, cheap and slave labor, and minimal to nonexistent environmental, workplace safety and pollution control rules to underprice competitors for sales of metals and minerals, transformers, wind turbines, solar panels and electric vehicles.

These hard realities should give President Trump all the authority he needs to advance tariffs.  But for those yet unconvinced, there’s still more reasons to be concerned.

Chinese companies have purchased thousands of acres of land near military bases, potentially enabling them to spy on those facilities. Other CCP actors, including students on American college campuses, have engaged in cyber theft of sensitive business, industrial, government, and defense data and information.

For decades, the CCP has been sending millions of dollars to U.S. universities and activist groups, to promote “green energy” – thereby spurring sales of Chinese wind, solar, battery and transformer equipment to America. It was a daring, devious, and all-too-successful tactic.

The Energy Foundation was launched in 1991 with grants from Pew, Rockefeller and MacArthur “charitable” foundations, which later established the Energy Foundation China, in Beijing. Today the China office is running the operation – calling itself simply the “Energy Foundation” and using the original US tax ID number, but with clear ties to the Chinese Communist Party.

The metamorphosed entity has become primarily a “pass-through” organization, which can receive anonymous donations (“dark money”) from American, Chinese and other secretive donors – and quietly send funds to universities and activist organizations around the USA, to influence policies, regulations, legislation and subsidies.

Its success can be measured by how thoroughly “climate alarmist” ideologies infected the Biden White House and Democrat Party. They helped advance programs to frighten people about “climate cataclysms,” eliminate fossil fuels, ban gas stoves and furnaces, and to transform US and Western economies to wind and solar power and electric vehicles – policies which weakened the American economy but advanced Chinese business interests.

Infinitely more alarming, however, is what former FBI Director Christopher Wray told “60 Minutes” in January: The Chinese government and military have “pre-positioned themselves” and inserted backdoor portals into nearly the entire critical American civilian infrastructure!

They are now able to simply “lie in wait on those networks,” ready at a moment’s notice to “wreak havoc” and “inflict real-world harm at a time and place of their choosing.” While Mr. Wray’s FBI was targeting people praying at abortion clinics and speaking up at school board meetings, the Chinese were setting themselves up to attack America’s “water treatment plants, transportation systems, energy sector, electric grid, natural gas pipelines,” major and neighborhood transformers, and other facilities.

Imagine the horrific implications. Amid roiling tensions or an actual war, China could render our water unsafe to drink, shut down our gas pipelines and electricity grid, disrupt subways and traffic lights, commandeer vehicles, interrupt food shipments – or merely threaten to do so … or hit just one city to give us a taste of what they are capable of.

Millions of lives would be at risk, and we could be powerless to stop them.

Little of this is new news. But the previous administration and Congress – like the electric utility, water and transportation sectors – have been grossly inadequate in their responses to the growing crisis.

Fortunately, times have changed.  While the tariffs may not impact these matters directly, they do send a message to the Chinese that the new sheriff in town is keeping an eye on them.  They best tread lightly.

This article originally appeared at NewsMax

Environmentalists silent on human and environmental atrocities

While wind and solar do not emit carbon dioxide, there are substantial environmental degradation and human atrocities occurring in China, Africa, Turkey, Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile. The materials for EV batteries and to produce electricity from wind turbines and solar panels require large-scale mining of critical minerals and metals, many of which are mined and refined in countries like China and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where human rights violations against miners are common and environmental protections are limited.

From CFACT

By Ronald Stein

Group of young environmentalists planting in park

While wind and solar do not emit carbon dioxide, there are substantial environmental degradation and human atrocities occurring in China, Africa, Turkey, Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile. The materials for EV batteries and to produce electricity from wind turbines and solar panels require large-scale mining of critical minerals and metals, many of which are mined and refined in countries like China and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where human rights violations against miners are common and environmental protections are limited.

Environmentalists have tunnel vision toward the wealthier countries on this planet that can afford the cost of regulations for the environmental movement to necessitate large batteries for electric cars, trucks, and buses, and for electricity to be generated occasionally by wind turbines and solar panels; this tunnel vision is hypocritical, unethical, and immoral.

  • China controls a stranglehold of 80% of the global supply monopoly on rare earth minerals and metals.
  • The Congo in Africa is a 90% source of vital cobalt.
  • Lithium: The Lithium Triangle, which covers parts of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, holds more than 50% of the world’s supply of lithium.
  • Graphite: On a total component basis for an EV battery, graphite is about 25% to 28% of the whole EV battery. Turkey has the largest reserves of graphite, followed by Brazil and China. Together, these three countries accounted for 66% of the estimated world graphite reserves.

Today, a typical EV battery weighs 1,000 pounds and contains:

  • 25 pounds of lithium,
  • 60 pounds of nickel,
  • 44 pounds of manganese,
  • 30 pounds cobalt,
  • 200 pounds of copper, and
  • 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic.
  • Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells.

It should concern everyone that all those “blood minerals” come from mining at locations in the world that are never seen by environmentalists, policymakers, or EV buyers.

For instance, to manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, just one Tesla EV battery requires the processing of more than 500,000 pounds of materials somewhere on the planet.

A battery for a heavy-duty electric truck can weigh up to 16,000 pounds, which is 16 times more than the Tesla battery! A single truck battery requires 8,000,000 pounds of earth to be dug up. That’s astounding – digging up 8 million pounds of earth for each truck battery!

EVs are heavily subsidized in multiple ways: through direct federal and state tax benefits to purchasers, through government loan incentives to manufacturers, and through added production costs passed on to gasoline vehicle purchasers.

Both China and Africa have minimal labor and environmental laws, resulting in extensive environmental degradation and humanity atrocities that support “clean” EV batteries. Both Lithium and Cobalt, the major components of the EV battery, are noted on The Periodic Table of Endangered Elements as having limited availability or experiencing a rising threat from increased usage.

It appears that it is both unethical and immoral to continue financially encouraging China and Africa to exploit “their” poor with yellow, brown, and black skin and financially supporting environmental degradation to “their” landscapes just to support clean EV batteries in “our backyards.”

The safety of lithium-ion batteries is becoming a sensitive subject. If they’re punctured, crushed, or overheated, they can short-circuit, catch on fire, or even explode. Things can get nasty when they do. EV battery fires can reach temperatures topping 1,000 degrees and emit toxic gases. Worse, they can’t be extinguished by water or normal firefighting chemicals. With potential fires from the EV batteries in vehicles:

> Who is going to take the insurance responsibility for their safe passage from the foreign manufacturers to American ports, the cargo ships, or the manufacturers?

> Who is going to take the insurance responsibility for the potential damage from such an EV battery fire in a garage, from an office or apartment building, an underground parking structure, or in a tunnel of a major highway system?

The recent book, “Clean Energy Exploitations” – Helping Citizens Understand the Environmental and Humanity Abuses That Support Clean Energy, was nominated for the Pulitzer Prize. The book discusses the lack of transparency to the world of the green movement’s impact on humanity’s exploitations in the developing countries that are mining for the exotic minerals and metals required to create the batteries needed to store “green energy.” In these developing countries, these mining operations disproportionately impact low-income communities, exploit child labor, and are responsible for the most egregious human rights violations of vulnerable minority populations. These operations are also directly destroying the planet through environmental degradation.

Soon after the “Clean Energy Exploitations” nomination for a Pulitzer Prize, President Biden provided validation to the book’s message that there is no such thing as a clean supply chain of minerals and metals from lesser developed countries. All are tainted by various degrees of abuse, including slavery, child labor, forced labor, debt bondage, human trafficking, hazardous and toxic working conditions, low wages, injury and death, and incalculable environmental harm when the Biden administration declared October 4, 2022, that batteries from China may be tainted by child labor. However, other government leaders believe that zero emissions at any cost is more important than the environmental and human abuses that support “clean” electricity.

Of the six electrical generation methods, occasional generated electricity from wind and solar cannot compete with continuous uninterruptable electricity from hydro, nuclear, coal, or natural gas:

> Wind and solar generate occasional electricity.

> Hydro, nuclear, coal, and natural gas generate continuous uninterruptible electricity.

I find it both amusing and sick that twenty-three states have adopted goals to move to 100 percent “clean” ELECTRICITY by 2050. The elephant in the room that no policymaker wants to discuss is that:

> Occasional electricity generated from wind and solar CANNOT supports computers for hospitals, airports, offices, manufacturing, military sites, data centers, and telemetry, which all need continuous uninterruptable supplies of electricity.

> Neither the occasional electricity from wind turbines nor solar panels can replace the supply chain of products from crude oil, which are the foundation of our materialistic society demanded by the 8 billion on this planet, as wind and solar CANNOT manufacture anything.

Please share this information with your friends to encourage energy literacy conversations at the family dinner table.

China’s dangerous battery monopoly

China is positioned to adversely influence lithium-ion battery production worldwide. China has monopoly control over processed graphite, an essential component of almost all lithium-ion batteries. Virtually all processed graphite, natural and synthetic, is made in China then exported to the battery makers worldwide.

MASHAN, CHINA – MAY 28 A graphite worker walks across the Jin Yang graphite factory in the town of Mashan, China on May 28, 2016. Workers have very little safety equipment at many of the graphite factories. The northeastern province of Heilongjiang is rich in graphite and there are numerous mines and factories in the region. Locals who live in proximity to the factories complain of contaminated air and water affecting their crops and health. The graphite, which is purchased by Samsung and LG Chem, is a key ingredient in lithium batteries for mobile phones and electric cars. (Michael Robinson Chavez/The Washington Post)

From CFACT

By David Wojick

China has acquired dangerous monopoly power over battery production worldwide. CFACT has published my brief study report on this new threat — “CHINA’S GRAPHITE MONOPOLY.”

To begin with, here is the Executive Summary:

“China is positioned to adversely influence lithium-ion battery production worldwide. China has monopoly control over processed graphite, an essential component of almost all lithium-ion batteries. Virtually all processed graphite, natural and synthetic, is made in China then exported to the battery makers worldwide.

These batteries are used universally in electric and electronic devices, from cell phones and watches to EVs and huge grid-scale backup batteries; there are numerous essential military uses, as well.

China is just now beginning to implement an export control program for processed graphite. By controlling exports, China could, to a significant degree, adversely influence much lithium-ion battery production, such as by raising prices to selected producers or even blacklisting entire countries.

Thus, the potential adverse impact of Chinese monopoly power is enormous. What they will actually do remains to be seen, but the threat is very real.”

A lot has been written about China’s market power in other crucial materials like cobalt and rare earths. But, these cases are weak compared to its monopoly in processed graphite.

In both cases, China is a major player, coincidentally producing about 70% of processed cobalt and 70% of rare earths. Numbers like this are nothing like monopoly control, as there are a lot of other suppliers. In fact, China consumes most of its production because it makes a lot of lithium-ion batteries. It is actually a net importer of rare earths.

In contrast, the policy world seems oblivious to China’s far more dangerous processed graphite monopoly. The only place I have seen it mentioned is by start-ups looking for funding to build domestic production capacity.

There is no lack of raw graphite, as China only produces about 16% of the global total. So, there would be no problem supplying domestic producers with processed graphite. The problem is that the monopoly threat does not stimulate financing because nobody knows about it.

The destructive power of unconstrained monopoly is standard text,  i.e., economics. We should be having a large, loud discussion of this threat.

To kick such a discussion off, here is the quick take from my report:

“While no individual Chinese graphite producing or exporting firm has monopoly power, the central permitting authority does have that power if it chooses to assume it. Whether it can or not depends on the internal authority structure and policies of the Chinese government.

Given the far-reaching, potential adverse consequences of such a monopoly, it is certainly worth considering this possibility. It would amount to central planning for strategic purposes.

How monopolies assert destructive power is well-known from both theory and experience. China can easily raise prices to individual battery makers, graphite brokers, or entire countries. In particular, this export-permitting program could become part of a trade war with America, making us a likely target.

Since China is a major battery maker, it could go after its competitors. In principle, China could wipe out a rival battery maker by simply not supplying the essential graphite or it could simply raise the price to that competitor over time, which would be much harder to detect.

Whole markets might be targeted; for example, China could affect the EV market where serious competitors have existed or recently arisen in various countries. Driving up the price of an EV’s battery increases the EV’s price, as well. Simply driving up the price of EV batteries increases electric vehicle prices, making them uncompetitive with cheaper Chinese models.

More broadly, China produces a lot of different lithium-ion batteries, as well as devices that use them. Any of the many competitor markets could be targeted for monopoly action.

There are even geopolitical possibilities. Reportedly, many countries are looking to get into the EV battery-making business. China could force such countries to cooperate in other ways as a condition of supplying them with graphite.

If the above measures seem far-fetched, keep in mind that a monopoly in essential supplies is a very powerful position, and thus a very tempting action to take, well short of open warfare, but still very effective.”

China’s battery graphite monopoly is a clear danger to America and the world. Policy people need to start thinking about this new threat.

More than 3,000 auto dealers sign letter opposing Biden’s electric vehicle mandate

Electric vehicles ‘are stacking up on our lots,’ car dealers write to Biden

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/3000-auto-dealers-sign-letter-opposing-bidens-electric-vehicle-mandate

By Thomas Catenacci

FOXBusiness

A coalition of more than 3,000 auto dealers nationwide is sending an open letter to President Biden, calling on him to “tap the brakes” on his administration’s aggressive electric vehicle (EV) push.

The coalition — which includes dealers located in all 50 states and who collectively sell every major car brand — is taking particular aim at the Biden administration’s tailpipe emissions standards released earlier this year which are the most aggressive federal regulations of their kind ever issued. Under the regulations proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the majority of new vehicle purchases will be electric within a decade.

“These vehicles are ideal for many people, and we believe their appeal will grow over time,” the dealers wrote in their letter to Biden on Tuesday. “The reality, however, is that electric vehicle demand today is not keeping up with the large influx of BEVs [battery electric vehicles] arriving at our dealerships prompted by the current regulations. BEVs are stacking up on our lots.”

“Last year, there was a lot of hope and hype about EVs,” the letter continued. “Early adopters formed an initial line and were ready to buy these vehicles as soon as we had them to sell. But that enthusiasm has stalled. Today, the supply of unsold BEVs is surging, as they are not selling nearly as fast as they are arriving at our dealerships — even with deep price cuts, manufacturer incentives, and generous government incentives.”

They added that, while the goals of the EPA regulations are admirable, they are also “unrealistic based on current and forecasted customer demand.” The dealers further noted that the best indicator of customer demand in the auto marketplace is how EVs are stacking up in their lots.

The letter further noted that there are many issues facing the EV industry such as lacking charging infrastructure, energy grid instability and a lack of reliable mineral supplies vital for EV batteries.

“Mr. President, it is time to tap the brakes on the unrealistic government electric vehicle mandate. Allow time for the battery technology to advance. Allow time to make BEVs more affordable. Allow time to develop domestic sources for the minerals to make batteries,” the letter stated. 

“Allow time for the charging infrastructure to be built and prove reliable. And most of all, allow time for the American consumer to get comfortable with the technology and make the choice to buy an electric vehicle.”

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), for example, China produces about 75% of all lithium-ion batteries, a key component of EVs, worldwide. The nation also boasts 70% of production capacity for cathodes and 85% for anodes, two key parts of such batteries.

In addition, more than 50% of lithium, cobalt and graphite processing and refining capacity is located in China, the IEA data showed. Those three critical minerals, in addition to copper and nickel, are vital for EV batteries and other green energy technologies. Chinese investment firms have also been aggressive in purchasing stakes in African mines in recent years to ensure a firm control over mineral production.

California’s EV conundrums

Without crude oil that is the basis for most of the products now in society, citizens of developing nations may never be able to enjoy the abundant lifestyles available to wealthier countries.

From  CFACT

Without crude oil that is the basis for most of the products now in society, citizens of developing nations may never be able to enjoy the abundant lifestyles available to wealthier countries.

As California is attempting to lead the world toward zero crude oil production, worldwide efforts to meet the supply chain demands of extracting 4 billion gallons of crude oil every day from this planet, there may be shortages and inflation in perpetuity to continue to make all the products of our materialistic society, being enjoyed by the current residents in the wealthier countries on this planet.

Meanwhile, the list of conundrums surrounding California’s EV mandate is growing:

  1. Lack of a sufficient number of buyers outside the elite profile of existing EV owners.
  2. The Government’s lack of ethical, moral, and social responsibilities, by encouraging the social injustice of subsidies for well-off people who can afford EVs, continues exploiting the human rights of workers with yellow, brown, and black skin in the supply chain that are mining for exotic minerals and metals in poorer developing countries to support the green movement in wealthy countries.
  3. Conditions have grown so dire for the supply chain of raw materials needed for EV batteries that Washington is cracking down on EV components that have links to Chinese Uyghur slave labor that are helping to build EVs.
  4. Due to EV battery fire potentials, questionable means of transporting EVs from foreign manufacturers to the USA consumers.
  5. Concerns about occasional electricity from wind and solar being able to charge EV batteries.
  6. The limited life of the EV battery compared with conventional vehicles, the limitations of EVs during emergencies such as fires, floods, and power blackouts.
  1. China restricting exports of graphite, a key mineral used for making EV batteries.
  2. Automakers will continue to face challenging supply chain issues to make all the parts and components of EVs as the supply of oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil will be in shorter supply. The typical car today is made with about 260 pounds of plastics.

The crude oil industry’s time in California is limited, and the oil-refining industry is behaving as any industry would in comparable circumstances by transitioning its operations away from gasoline to activities that will prove to be more profitable in the long run. And as crude oil supply falls further, much higher gasoline prices will become a way of life for Californians, as the conundrums associated with EV mandates may be growing.

Standard economic logic indicates that high California gas prices should encourage fuels supply to be shipped to California from other states. But this doesn’t happen because no other state formulates California’s unique gasoline blend.

In addition, the West Coast fuels market is isolated from other supply/demand centers as California is an energy island. The Sierra Mountains are a natural barrier that prevents the state from pipeline access to any of that excess oil. As such, the West Coast is susceptible to unexpected outages from West Coast refineries as it is unable to refill an unexpected loss in supply by quickly supplying additional products from outside of the region.

If gasoline is imported into California, which does occur when a California refinery goes offline for repair or maintenance, California typically imports gasoline via marine shipments, which usually take three to four weeks to deliver. To meet the demands of the fourth largest economy in the world, imports of gasoline into California come from sources that include India, South Korea, the United Kingdom, Russia, and New Brunswick, Canada. This process is expensive, and takes weeks for the fuel to arrive at California ports.

California’s regulatory and tax landscape has led to a steady drop in the number of California refineries. In the early 1980s, when California’s population was 24 million, there were 40 operating refineries in the state, which refined over 2.5 million barrels of crude oil per day. Forty years later, with a population of 39 million, the number of refineries dropped by 14, which refines less than 2 million barrels of crude oil per day currently. The reality is that gasoline and diesel supply is decreasing while demand is increasing; is fuel (no pun intended) for continuous price increases.

Refineries are also shutting down because California has imposed a new regulation that bans the sale of gas-powered cars and light trucks by 2035, and the State requires 35 percent of new car sales to be zero-emission vehicles by 2026. It makes no economic sense to invest in new capacity in a state that has de facto outlawed the industry’s existence in a few years.

In addition, refineries are also shutting down because there are incredibly lucrative state and federal tax incentives to produce biofuels, totaling a whopping $1 per gallon, and cease the manufacturing of gasoline and diesel. A Marathon refinery that had a crude oil refining capacity of 166,000 barrels per day is being retrofitted to produce biodiesel and is expected to be producing biofuel next year. Similarly, Global Clean Energy is converting a 66,000-barrel-per-day-capacity refinery in Bakersfield to biodiesel, and World Energy has invested $350 million to convert a 50,000-barrel-per-day-capacity refinery to biodiesel.

California regulators and legislators are getting what they want: less crude oil produced and consumed. And Californians, particularly low- and middle-income households, are paying a dear price for the preferences of those Tesla-driving legislators and regulators as fuel demand remains against a diminishing supply of gasoline and diesel.

You cannot build something from nothing. Thus, California’s EV conundrums will most likely grow as everything that needs electricity, and every infrastructure, has parts and components that are made from oil derivatives manufactured from crude oil, from the light bulb to the iPhone, defibrillator, and all the parts of toilets, spacecraft, and EVs.

Author

Ronald Stein

Ronald Stein is an engineer, senior policy advisor on energy literacy for CFACT, and co-author of the Pulitzer Prize nominated book “Clean Energy Exploitations.”

China Restricts Exports of Graphite, Key Mineral Used for Making EV Batteries

Rough piece of carbon rock mineral in the form of graphite, an allotrope of carbon, known for its use in pencils

Graphite is a critical component in the production process of lithium-ion batteries used in EVs. China is the world’s biggest producer of graphite, and last year accounted for close to two-thirds of global production of the critical mineral.

From NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

More bad news for the EV rollout!

https://www.investopedia.com/china-restricts-exports-of-graphite-a-key-mineral-used-for-making-ev-batteries-8364318

Do we really want to put our whole economy at the mercy of President Xi?