Live data from Hacker News

Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

gao.gov

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#81

Start by banning disposable vapes. The sheer waste of lithium from those fucking devices is insane in 2026. We need every scrap of it we can get!

95% come from China? Why ban importing the materials you desire, which are not going to magically be cheaper by banning them, instead of providing services to simply and easily recycle them?

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#82
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because China has stated they will take Taiwan, they have been threatening Philippines sovereignty too. Japan and others are on edge too. China currently has been behaving very adversarial and has a huge fraction of the minerals under their control that this article is posting about. I think sovereignty is a good thing. Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

The USA keeps threatening my country; Canada. I can say with a reasonable amount of confidence that going "but china" isn't going to help the US much going forward.

Well, to be fair, by “USA“ you mean one person who is frankly more ceremonial than an actual leader. Whereas I think China is doing much more to actually irreversibly change who has the real authority in Canada. Canada is also a uniquely bad case in governance. I don’t know if any western country has had so much decline in living standard so fast. That you could put Fidel Castro‘s bastard son in charge says a lot about who holds the cards there.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#83
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the subject is China, the reflection isn't "because China". What we are seeing here is "Because US", which is very different.

The subject of "Why is everyone preparing for war so hard" would seem to be "everyone", no?

The subject is critical minerals. China is therefore why here. Of course in the large picture everyone is preparing for war.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#84
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren’t. Political will is faulting but the military is holding back on Iran. There is no follow on ground invasion or clear carpet bombing of the entire country. These strikes are all suppose to be strategic. If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass I am not supportive of war with Iran by a long shot but to see the US military and be like “oh it’s strained” is jus…

>If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass Then the Gulf oil infrastructure would be gone in retaliation and the impacts to the global economy would be severe . Trump's popularity and legacy would be utterly destroyed.

Doesn’t negate capability which is what is being mentioned.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia may be ready to attack the alliance within five years. Russia can't even take the country next door. How exactly are they going to attack NATO? With a bunch of rusty nukes that almost certainly no longer work, and that would get their (relatively few) major population centers vaporized by nukes that almost certainly work just fine?

"Almost certainly no longer work"? I'd be interested in seeing your basis for your "almost certainly".

Have you seen the state of the rest of their armaments? Countries that have to bum artillery and soldiers off of North Korea are not in any position to go up against NATO.

If you're a Russian officer in charge of nuclear stockpile maintenance, why in the world wouldn't you pencil-whip the paperwork and steal the funding? If you're ever caught, it will be under circumstances where nobody will be in a position to do anything about it.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#86
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more Do you have more information about this, or a source?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/russia-nato-arms-germany-wa... > Germany's defence minister is frank and plain-spoken, but also deliberate with his words and intention. When he talks about Russia, the future of the West and the possibility of another European war, the message however becomes stark: "Our experts say it can happen in 2029." > In remarks published Wednesday, Generalleutnant Christian Freuding, the insp…

> Russia may be ready to attack the alliance within five years.

With what, sharpened sticks? Russia will soon only be left with rattling its nuclear saber as its once mighty military is left in ruins.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#87
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the US military was waging a true all out war, Iran would be piles of rubble and glass Then the Gulf oil infrastructure would be gone in retaliation and the impacts to the global economy would be severe . Trump's popularity and legacy would be utterly destroyed.

Doesn’t negate capability which is what is being mentioned.

The USA wouldn't be able to invade and carpet bomb China and end the war before logistical strain started to show either.

There's no point talking about USA's theoretical capabilities to end a war quickly if they can't use those capabilities to end a war quickly. Yes, the USA is holding back on invasion, carpet bombing, total war and nukes. It doesn't matter to the Chinese assessment for the capability of sustained high intensity US military operations.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#88
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A war with large geographic scope has been independently modeled as having a high probability of occurring circa 2030 by major governments for a decade or more Do you have more information about this, or a source?

This has been discussed in strategic geopolitical circles for a long time. When surveying defense analysts and similar if they believe a "great powers conflict" will occur in the near future, the percentage that say yes has been rising rapidly (currently 40-50%). If you search for "probability of global war in $YEAR" you will find a lot of discussion of varying quality. The major alignment is almost always assumed to…

Up until a about a decade back, here in Australia/New Zealand, politicians behind door always talked about the tyranny of distance. Simply due to distance we were largely kept out of or behind larger global flows.

Nowadays it is seen as having the world largest moat.

When things like global conflict starts, it does impact us but it is more the flow on effects rather than direct impacts.

The last few minutes of this 2025 recap by 'Ordinary Things' did the best job or summarizing how the world is getting ready for war.

https://youtu.be/ZEobLPh82-w?si=hrUaw-vTx4mWU6T6&t=6627

I hope we avoid this but I fear we will not.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia may be ready to attack the alliance within five years. Russia can't even take the country next door. How exactly are they going to attack NATO? With a bunch of rusty nukes that almost certainly no longer work, and that would get their (relatively few) major population centers vaporized by nukes that almost certainly work just fine?

> Russia can't even take the country next door. Neither could the Weimar Republic. > With a bunch of rusty nukes that almost certainly no longer work, and that would get their (relatively few) major population centers vaporized by nukes that almost certainly work just fine? Even 1% of Russia's arsenal being functional would be a problem, and I can imagine someone taking a gamble on "will Germany/France/England want t…

Pretty much this. If a single nuke detonates over say Leipzig, it would be the most deadly single attack on European soil in history.

Re: Critical Minerals: Reducing U.S. import reliance with substitution and recycling

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Almost certainly no longer work"? I'd be interested in seeing your basis for your "almost certainly".

Have you seen the state of the rest of their armaments? Countries that have to bum artillery and soldiers off of North Korea are not in any position to go up against NATO. If you're a Russian officer in charge of nuclear stockpile maintenance, why in the world wouldn't you pencil-whip the paperwork and steal the funding? If you're ever caught, it will be under circumstances where nobody will be in a position to do an…

There is a good chance of this. Nukes need ongoing yearly maintenance to be operational, without that they are basically just a flying tin can. The whole movie trope of stealing an old nuke and using it doesn't apply to the real world.

Also corruption is somewhat accepted in some countries as it allows those at the top to have legitimate means of disposing of traitors when needed without that hassle of drumming up fake charges.

Post reply on HN