Introduction
This article was flagged for fact-checking due to reader concerns over China’s newly announced export restrictions on rare earth elements and their potential ramifications, particularly for U.S. manufacturing and national defense. With rare earths playing a critical role in both consumer technologies and military applications, understanding fact from hype is vital to assessing the true impact of China’s decision.
Historical Context
Rare earth elements (REEs) have long been a point of geopolitical tension due to their essential use in modern technology and green energy. China began dominating the global rare earths market in the 1990s, capitalizing on both cost advantages and state-backed expansion. By the 2010s, it controlled more than 80% of global rare earth supply. Previous incidents, such as a brief export halt to Japan in 2010, demonstrated how rare earths can be leveraged for political and economic influence. The U.S. has worked since then to reduce its dependence, but with limited success, as China remains the epicenter for both mining and refining.
Fact-Check of Specific Claims
Claim #1: “China’s new restrictions on exports of the metals could have an impact on the production of everything from LED lights to fighter jets.”
This claim is accurate and supported by historical data. China controls approximately 60–70% of rare earth mining and over 85% of rare earth refining globally, according to the U.S. Geological Survey and the International Energy Agency. Rare earths are indispensable in electronics, renewable energy components, and military systems. For example, neodymium and praseodymium are essential magnets used in fighter jet actuators and guidance systems. Therefore, any significant disruptions in China’s supply chain, whether due to policy shifts or trade disputes, can directly affect manufacturing sectors across the globe, particularly in countries like the U.S. that depend heavily on imports.
Claim #2: “The United States has just one operational rare earths mine, in Mountain Pass, Calif., which produces around 15 percent of global rare earths.”
This statement is only partially accurate. The Mountain Pass mine, operated by MP Materials, does account for roughly 15% of global rare earth mineral production as of 2024, according to company reports and the U.S. Department of Energy. However, the article omits a key detail: while the mine produces significant material, nearly all of it is shipped to China for processing. Until recently, the U.S. lacked robust domestic refining infrastructure. Although efforts are now underway to build U.S.-based separation and refining facilities, these are not yet at scale. Therefore, while the mining figure is correct, the U.S. remains reliant on Chinese processing—an important context the article excludes.
Claim #3: “Heavy rare earths are typically more rare, meaning they sell in smaller quantities and are prone to shortages.”
This claim is broadly accurate and substantiated by materials science research. Heavy rare earth elements (such as terbium and dysprosium) are found in lower concentrations and fewer geologic deposits than light rare earths. According to research published in Nature and the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), heavy rare earths are also less likely to be recovered efficiently without advanced processing methods, often concentrated in southern Chinese ion-adsorption clay deposits. Because of their restricted sources and higher refining complexity, they are significantly more vulnerable to market shortages and price volatility when compared to their light counterparts.
Claim #4: “Magnets made from rare earths are significantly more powerful — and valuable — than other types, especially in electric car production.”
This statement is accurate. Magnets formed using neodymium-iron-boron (NdFeB), enhanced with dysprosium or terbium for heat resistance, are among the strongest commercially available permanent magnets. These are essential for high-efficiency electric motors used in electric vehicles and wind turbines. A study by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory confirms that permanent magnets made from rare earths outperform traditional ferrite or alnico magnets and are the technology of choice for applications where compact power and durability are required. Hence, the claim is substantiated both scientifically and economically.
Conclusion
The article by Eli Tan provides a largely accurate overview of China’s control over rare earth exports and the global implications tied to that dominance. Most claims align with established research and government data, especially about the minerals’ role in defense and energy technologies. However, the article lacks depth when discussing U.S. dependencies in rare earth processing. While it correctly notes domestic mining at Mountain Pass, it omits that most refining still occurs in China, a crucial element for understanding the broader supply chain vulnerability. Overall, the article is factually sound but could benefit from fuller context to better inform readers about U.S. capacity constraints.
Want to Cut Through Noise? You Can Help Stop Fake News
Join DBUNK’s growing community by downloading the mobile app and stay equipped to challenge misinformation in real time. Our tools give you instant clarity on the stories that matter. Follow us on social media and become part of a future built on facts.
Link to Original Article
Read the article here: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/15/technology/rare-earth-metals-china-exports.html
