pull down to refresh
Li-Cycle and Redwoods Materials have already made recycling both EV batteries and Redwoods is expanding their offerings to more components. The chemistry aspect of separation the National Labs have already hashed out which is much less toxic than what China uses.
This list is also missing a few other companies like USA Rare Earths who is brining there Stillwater, OK magnet facility online this year (its already been running test runs) and Niron Magnetics is scaling up its permeant magnet manufacturing with its pilot plant already delivering 1,000s of tons and its Commercial plant due to be operational in early 2027.
China will likely maintain some of their supply chain long term but anything National Security related will start moving to direct US or 5 Eyes minerals as soon as they can.
much less toxic than what China use
why is toxicity relevant?
If it's not relevant, don't bring it up, it's empty filler
I asked Lumo (proton)...
Key Take‑aways
Short‑term (next 2‑3 years)
Pilot plants and early‑stage refineries (e.g., MP Materials’ Utah pilot, Caremag financing) will start producing limited quantities of refined rare‑earth oxides and magnets. These projects begin to diversify supply, but China will still dominate (> 70 % of processing).
Medium‑term (2025‑2027)
Government‑driven “mine‑to‑magnet” programs (U.S. DoD, Japanese METI) aim for strategic‑defense independence by the 2027 timeframe. Expect a handful of hundred‑ton‑scale magnet production lines, enough to meet military needs but still a tiny slice of the global market.
Long‑term (by 2030 and beyond)
Planned refineries in the U.S., Europe, and Australia could collectively achieve roughly half of China’s 2024 processing capacity. Even then, China would retain a sizable lead because of its entrenched expertise, supply‑chain integration, and lower cost base. Full parity may not be realistic until the 2030s, assuming continued policy support and capital investment.
What drives the timeline?
Capital intensity & technical expertise – Building a rare‑earth separation plant costs hundreds of millions of dollars and requires specialized chemistry knowledge that China has cultivated for decades.
Regulatory environment – Western environmental standards raise costs and lengthen permitting times; easing these (while maintaining safety) can accelerate projects.
Strategic subsidies & public‑private partnerships – The U.S. DoD, Japan’s METI, and European ministries are already earmarking billions of dollars; the speed of disbursement influences construction schedules.
Demand growth – Rapid expansion of EVs, renewable‑energy gear, and defense systems pushes governments to prioritize supply‑chain resilience, which can compress timelines.
Bottom line
A meaningful reduction in China’s leverage is plausible within the next 5‑7 years, especially for defense‑critical supplies.
Achieving a truly balanced global rare‑earth market will likely take a decade or more, with the 2030 horizon being the earliest realistic point for external capacity to approach half of China’s current processing share.