Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth Hardware Technology

Japan Begins Recycling Rare Earth Metals From Electronics 168

Black Gold Alchemist writes "Dowa, a Japanese mining company in Kosaka, has begun the recycling of rare earth metals from used cellphones and computers. This is in response to a recent, temporary trade embargo from China, which is the leading supplier of rare earth metals needed for production of products including hybrid cars, wind turbines, and LCD screens. Because of the shortage of rare earth metals, Japanese trade minister Akihiro Ohata is asking the government to include a rare earth strategy in its supplementary budget for this year."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Japan Begins Recycling Rare Earth Metals From Electronics

Comments Filter:
  • about time too... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by advocate_one ( 662832 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:20AM (#33793036)
    should have been doing this ages ago, but yet again, no pressure to do so while supplies were cheap
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Wyatt Earp ( 1029 )

      The future is going to be like Against a Dark Background, we'll be going through the piles of debris looking for exotic metals.

      That or we go to the asteroids and mine them.

    • Maybe I've been mislead, but when I drop a busted motherboard (or other e-device with capacitors) off at my local e-waste recycling depot, isn't it being shipped to China (etc) for this recycling to happen?

      Or were the rare earths in the capacitors considered to be of no value given market conditions?

  • by arivanov ( 12034 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:23AM (#33793046) Homepage

    Well, this goes to show how much of electronics recycling is a gimmick and publicity stunt.

    Separating rare earths out of electronics waste is actually not that difficult: hit it with acid; do some basic purification first to get rid of Fe, Cu and a few other "usual suspects"; after that ion exchange chromatography does the deed. Even without initial mechanical separation there should be enough of them in the acid effluent. The fact that it was not done shows how much are we really "recycling" there.

    In fact, we should say thank you to China on this one. This may finally make EU, USA and Japan governments put some money behind the electronic waste disposal laws.

    • In fact, we should say thank you to China on this one.

      Recent news reports have Japan accusing China of this being over a territorial dispute [washingtonexaminer.com]. The traders are saying that things have resumed [businessweek.com] but that this is just an excuse for China to harass traders and outbound exports with "preshipment" checks [reuters.com]. China denies this has anything to do with the dispute but the timing is more than a bit suspect and why is this only directed at Japan?

      I don't know how much of an net positive environmental impact recycling rare earths from circuitry provides (is your acid econ

      • In fact, we should say thank you to China on this one.

        Recent news reports have Japan accusing China of this being over a territorial dispute [washingtonexaminer.com]. The traders are saying that things have resumed [businessweek.com] but that this is just an excuse for China to harass traders and outbound exports with "preshipment" checks [reuters.com]. China denies this has anything to do with the dispute but the timing is more than a bit suspect and why is this only directed at Japan?

        China is in territorial dispute with every SE-Asian country that has a shoreline. They claim sovereignty over every island down to the Philippines. For example, they have claims over Paracel islands which in theory, belong to Vietnam. Recently they started to harass fishing boats, hold them at ransom, very similar to what Somalian pirates do. Vietnam has historical documents to prove their claim - irony is, that actually some of the documents the Chinese produced to prove their point turned out to be validate the Vietnamese claims (they mention these islands as "foreign lands" in their records). Also, they threatened foreign companies (oil exploration) that had contracts with Vietnamese oil companies to back out. Finally - this started this year - they began to organize "tours" to these islands, showing the beauty of these "most remote Chinese lands." In reality, there's nothing to see there actually. Except Vietnamese fishermen who lived there for generations. Well, not anymore, actually, but you get the point ... just trying to illustrate how territorial the Chinese are... and how arrogant.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          Paracel islands which in theory, belong to Vietnam

          In theory, they belong to the Earth. Everyone is arrogant in claiming land. What you said about China is the same as what Japan has been doing to China, and what Russia has been doing to Japan. But this time China found a way to challenge Japan because Japan positioned itself as "there is no territorial disputes between the countries".

        • It's also interesting to remember, on the last two or three attempts by (Imperial) China to invade Vietnam, they had their heads handed to them. The French and the US were not the first to find out that the Vietnamese do not go gently into that good night.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by hcdejong ( 561314 )

        I don't know how much of an net positive environmental impact recycling rare earths from circuitry provides

        As I recall, separating ore into rare earths isn't a clean process either, so it may still come out ahead.

    • by mean pun ( 717227 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:39AM (#33793144)

      Well, this goes to show how much of electronics recycling is a gimmick and publicity stunt.

      Actually, it shows that current electronics recycling is not a gimmick, at least in Japan. The entire infrastructure apparently is already in place, is functioning, and is economical enough to survive. There is more to recycling than just rare metals.

      • by wrook ( 134116 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @09:03AM (#33793858) Homepage

        it shows that current electronics recycling is not a gimmick, at least in Japan.

        Not terribly sure about electronics, but with everything else you'd probably be amazed. I have 7 different garbage categories in my town. I have to put my name and location on my garbage bags. If I make a mistake in sorting the garbage, they send it back to me (it has happened more than once...). And it's not just gross sorting. With pet bottles I have to take the caps off (different category) and the labels off (different category). My yogurt containers are made from recyclable plastic covered with cardboard. I have to separate the cardboard from the plastic and put it in different containers. Etc, etc, etc...

        Electronics is easy. You take it to the electronics shop and they take care of it for you. I'm not sure exactly what they do, but I'm assuming it's fairly rigorous. Japan just doesn't have any landfill space...

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          it shows that current electronics recycling is not a gimmick, at least in Japan.

          Not terribly sure about electronics, but with everything else you'd probably be amazed. I have 7 different garbage categories in my town. I have to put my name and location on my garbage bags. If I make a mistake in sorting the garbage, they send it back to me (it has happened more than once...). And it's not just gross sorting. With pet bottles I have to take the caps off (different category) and the labels off (different category). My yogurt containers are made from recyclable plastic covered with cardboard. I have to separate the cardboard from the plastic and put it in different containers. Etc, etc, etc...

          Electronics is easy. You take it to the electronics shop and they take care of it for you. I'm not sure exactly what they do, but I'm assuming it's fairly rigorous. Japan just doesn't have any landfill space...

          Where in Japan are you? Just curious.

          But other than that, you are on point. I was in Yokohama during new years eve, and it is amazing the discipline involved in the proper recycling of garbage (discipline displayed by both the collectors and the general population.) I believe it is not only out of modern necessity, but that Japan has historically been a clean country, much more than any other country as testified by Eastern and Western travelers back in the day.

          • I think it's that Japanese have always been meticulous in everything they do. They're also very good about following rules. In many countries, particularly the US, even people who believe in recycling would likely be pissed a the prospect of having to sort their garbage so extensively.

            And I can't help but wonder, why is the recycling company not doing this? Aren't these people paying taxes so that their garbage is processed properly?

            • I think it's that Japanese have always been meticulous in everything they do. They're also very good about following rules. In many countries, particularly the US, even people who believe in recycling would likely be pissed a the prospect of having to sort their garbage so extensively.

              And I can't help but wonder, why is the recycling company not doing this? Aren't these people paying taxes so that their garbage is processed properly?

              We in the US have a cultural problem where people get pissed off at anything that involves them moving a finger outside of their 9-5 work schedule.

              I hear ya. What you are describing is one of the many symptoms of a malady affecting the US. There is this parochial, not-in-my-backyard backward mentality where the government/something/somebody must solve all their problems so long as it does not involve them physically or financially (.ie. taxes.)

              Minimal government that can solve everything, including tu

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by SilverEyes ( 822768 )

          Electronics is easy. You take it to the electronics shop and they take care of it for you. I'm not sure exactly what they do, but I'm assuming it's fairly rigorous. Japan just doesn't have any landfill space...

          Often, it is sent to China http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/10/video-chinas-toxic-wastelands-of-consumer-electronics-revealed/ [engadget.com] . It is supposed to be illegal now, and presumably regulations are being enforced http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basel_Convention [wikipedia.org]

    • by Asic Eng ( 193332 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:45AM (#33793186)
      Mainly politics I think. They want to show a response to the Chinese embargo threat. China is punching way above it's political weight, mainly on the assumption that one day they'll actually reach that weight and is becoming increasingly aggressive with (very dubious) territorial claims against many of it's neighbors. They either need to adapt a more cooperative stance, or Japan is better served by being less dependent on China.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Rogerborg ( 306625 )

        Uh... if China closed its ports tomorrow, who would blink first: them, or the rest of the world?

        Up to now, China has been a most benign economic superpower, certainly far less abusive than Russia, the EU or the USA who engage in round-robin economic blackmail pretty much constantly.

        If China ever start punching at their actual weight - for example, asking what exactly they can buy with the trillions of foreign currency that they're sitting on - then we'll all be they beeyatches.

        • by samkass ( 174571 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @08:08AM (#33793346) Homepage Journal

          if China closed its ports tomorrow, who would blink first: them, or the rest of the world?

          If China tried that, it wouldn't actually happen and would show the lack of power their central government actually wages. It would probably lead to the overthrow of the Chinese government long before it brought down any foreign power.

          Up to now, China has been a most benign economic superpower, certainly far less abusive than Russia, the EU or the USA who engage in round-robin economic blackmail pretty much constantly.

          China's entire currency system is economic blackmail. By all rights it should have appreciated an extra 50%, and the rest of the world is increasingly unwilling to succumb to such blackmail.

          If China ever start punching at their actual weight - for example, asking what exactly they can buy with the trillions of foreign currency that they're sitting on - then we'll all be they beeyatches.

          They can't "buy" anything with it. They have to hold on to it in order to artificially affect the exchange rates of the currencies. Their dependence on US debt purchases for this means WE have THEM over a barrel. Relatively minor policy changes on our part could have sweeping effects on the valuation of their entire economic system. Of course, they have nowhere else to dump the money so they continue to rely on US debt purchases despite its weakness. Imagine if 90% of your 401K was also kept in your company's stock... think Enron's employees... that's what China is potentially setting itself up for by buying so much debt from their biggest trading partner and the largest economy in the world.

          • great.. you know how well that worked with the housing market-- right?

            A buttload of debt, and this system work so long as the borrowing continues-
            it'll keep working right? we just increase the value of our home(country) and
            refinance and buy a motorcycle or boat?

            what is that you say? real estate crash? when did that happen?
            what is this term? underwater? what does that mean?

            how does it feel to know that the US is propped up by it's debt structure.
            that if we were fiscally responsible, well- we'd be proppe

          • If the debt fueled currency manipulation system collapses tomorrow. China is far better off that the US - it would suck for both of them.

            What is the difference to China in any of the following:

            * Ship goods to the US in exchange for dollars which are converted to. The government then prints some local currency and buys treasuries with it to keep the exchange rate where they want it.

            * The government prints some local currency and exchanges that directly fore the goods, which are then dumped in the ocean.

            * Th

            • Oh, right, that's why every single country buys US debt. Literally every country on Earth is a sucker. It doesn't matter that we have the world's biggest economy, the most manufacturing, most R&D, the biggest, most advanced military, the largest entertainment sector, the fact that the US has a lower debt-to-GDP ratio than half the world (including many European countries), and the de facto language of worldwide trade is English.

              None of that matters. The US debt is garbage, despite the US Treasury Bonds

              • US debt is popular because international trade is done in US dollars and you might as well earn some interest on the holdings you have to have in order to play that game. And a US treasury is exactly equivalent to a US dollar since the US would print money to pay off those debts before they defaulted - hence no additional risk.

                Yes US treasuries are considered the safest debt in the world, but these things move slowly and the world hasn't woken up to the fact that the US can't possibly pay back all that deb

                • You have a point, but consider - the UK and the USSR were both at the height of their power while the US existed (the USSR didn't even exist before the US, while the UK was at the height of its power in the early 1920's) , and they both fell out of that position while the US existed, both largely because of the influences of the US. They also both still exist in incarnations that are internationally strong.

                  You also assume that the Chinese government doesn't collapse before the relatively small weight of the

          • Their dependence on US debt purchases for this means WE have THEM over a barrel. Relatively minor policy changes on our part could have sweeping effects on the valuation of their entire economic system.

            So the China is like a man handcuffed to a potential suicide on top of a skyscraper (the US), and if the potential suicide decides to jump they go with them? I'm not sure you should assume that the potential suicide is in the better position.

          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            Imagine if 90% of your 401K was also kept in your company's stock... think Enron's employees... that's what China is potentially setting itself up for by buying so much debt from their biggest trading partner and the largest economy in the world.

            Put another way... If you can't pay the bank back on a 200k mortgage you have a problem. If you can't pay the bank back on a trillion dollar loan the bank has a problem. In this case.. China is the bank.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          It wouldn't have those billions if it hadn't be manipulating it's currency for over a decade ... you are confusing biding their time with being benign. They can not just jank US and EU consumption and go completely domestic ... everything would instantly go to shit. They are not self sufficient in food or raw materials either.

          They will just wait for the US and the EU to slowly choke their consumption through austerity while they build up their internal consumption and start profiting from both all the facto

    • by zrbyte ( 1666979 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:47AM (#33793200)

      Separating rare earths out of electronics waste is actually not that difficult: hit it with acid; do some basic purification first to get rid of Fe, Cu and a few other "usual suspects"; after that ion exchange chromatography does the deed.

      Separating them from other stuff is easy, usually because these elements are very reactive. Separating them from each other is another, much harder task [acs.org]. Actually, using ion exchange chromatography I doubt you can get tonnes of chemically pure metal. You need a lot of fancy chemistry. Actually this is the most polluting part [rfa.org] of the industrial process and one of the contributing factors to closing US and European refining plants.

    • by elrous0 ( 869638 ) * on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @08:24AM (#33793506)
      Most "recycling" in the U.S. (probably most of the western world) consists of loading electronics into shipping containers and sending them to some third world shithole where the locals strip them in toxic working/living conditions. Interesting investigative report [cbsnews.com] not long ago from 60 Minutes on the subject (and it's a chance to see the rare bit of actual investigative journalism, before it goes completely extinct).
      • Yeah, they were only 5 years behind the curve too.

        Basel Action Network [ban.org]

        It's unfortunate that the developed world has put pure profit over ethics in disposal of their waste, but keep in mind that in most cases Africa and China are not simply the cheapest place, they are actually paying to have this waste dumped on their shores. China in particular has laws in place to stop the practice that they chose not to enforce because the value of the commodities is great and the cost of labor and health concerns
    • You've all heard the "fly ash is nuclear waste too" bullshit from the 1970s from the Oak Ridge newsletter article that also suggested that terrorists could build nuclear bombs from coal ash. Stepping a little closer to reality there are other impurities in larger amounts. At coal fire power stations you can see whopping great big dams filled with water and light ash from the scrubbers. Most of the stuff in there is silica but heavier compounds sink and there should be some layering from gravity separatio
    • by geekoid ( 135745 )

      Clearly, if you can break it down to aone sentences it's not hard.

      Shheeesh. It is hard.

  • by spectrokid ( 660550 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:29AM (#33793084) Homepage
    The technology has been around for years. [umicore.com] I guess what is new is that the suits no longer see it as a "green" thing but as a necessary supply line.
    • by arivanov ( 12034 )

      The tech described there is metallurgy. It is good for recovering Fe, Cu and Pb (which is nowdays banned anyway). I have some doubts about its ability to recover rare earths effectively.

    • by txoof ( 553270 )

      I wonder if we will see landfill mining in our lifetimes? It seems like we'd need a pretty astounding shortage of Cu and Fe before it would be energy efficient to start digging through the landfills for old TVs and washing machines

      • Landfill mining is sort of already happening. Copper "dealers" buy or "liberate" certain parts from cars in junkyards for the copper. Try finding the main battery leads for any BMW with a rear-mounted battery. A junkyard may price these 15' long thick copper cables the same as the 6"-3' long battery leads (which are often made of steel instead of copper) on most cars.

        Also try finding copper piping in any abandoned house in a bad neighborhood.

        I've heard that transmission casings are one of the most highly pr

        • by txoof ( 553270 )

          Try finding your AC heat exchanger coils anywhere in New Orleans. Those suckers just vanish these days.

  • by siddesu ( 698447 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:30AM (#33793088)

    like, for example, importing the stuff from mongolia. this may turn out to be the faster and cheaper way out.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704380504575529383600995748.html [wsj.com]

    The most interesting part of this mini-debacle is how did the idea that there would be a shortage of rare earth elements came about at all, and why did the Chinese believe it, the idea being utter bullshit.

    While it is true that China manages to produce these cheaply at the moment, rare earth elements are available basically all over the place in similar proportions.

    Using them as a policy-making tool has done no harm to Japan, and potentially a lot of harm to the credibility of China as an economic player, especially to its counterparties in Asia, but also anyone who may have a reason to expect potential future clash of interests.

    While the Japanese acted out during the crisis as scared pussies, the Chinese appear to have played the role of the dumber party.

    Seeing great Asian powers like Japan and China just learning to dab at foreign relations after 6 decades of American dominance is very interesting.

    • by vlm ( 69642 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @08:11AM (#33793368)

      While it is true that China manages to produce these cheaply at the moment, rare earth elements are available basically all over the place in similar proportions.

      Correction, China produces zinc cheaply at the moment. Mostly due to complete lack of environmental regulation.

      The situation with indium is weird. If you scooped up a random perfectly mixed shovel full of global average earth crust, its 3x as high concentration as silver, which sounds GREAT. However, unlike silver, it never really accumulates anywhere. The current best source is some of the residue of zinc ore production, where its a spectacular 50 ppm, about 200x more concentrated than average crust composition. Silver sometimes is dug out of the ground in nuggets of more or less pure silver, which is a factor of a million more concentrated than average, plus or minus an order of magnitude. Thats why we have mines for silver, but no mines for indium.

      So indium is freaking everywhere, all over, at a very low level. Last I heard, it wanders around a tenth of gold price. You could get about ten oz of indium per thousand tons of "average crust"... At roughly current indium prices thats about a thousand bucks revenue for processing about a thousand tons of dirt. A buck a ton isn't going to do it, even with slave labor in China. But what if the price went up to, say, platinum prices? Thats $20K revenue for a thousand tons of dirt, or $20 per ton. I'm thinking $20/ton is economically viable, maybe even in the USA...

    • by geekoid ( 135745 )

      Yes, but when your current supply lines are focused on one place, changing them is expensive and time consuming.

      It's not like Japan has a lot of land they can mine on.

    • Which is why the Chinese gov. was running around for the last decade trying to buy REE mines and processing. There is more than enough to be dug up. The problem is processing. It is messy and expensive. The west needs to do this though. ANd, the Mongolia idea is total BS. ALl of the ore would still be sent to CHina.
  • Non-cycle? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Smallpond ( 221300 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:31AM (#33793092) Homepage Journal

    What this suggests is that there should be a middle ground between dumping stuff in a landfill and recycling it. We should be segregating material that we don't currently recycle or doesn't make economic sense to recycle, but might become scarce in the future. That will make it easier to recycle when we need it.

    • Re:Non-cycle? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by martas ( 1439879 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:54AM (#33793234)
      while this is a good idea (ok, a very good idea), the difficulty is implementing it. it's already difficult enough to separate the 5 or 6 kinds of materials that are being recycled today from trash, let alone extending that to a large number or other, potentially recyclable materials (which is, really, almost every kind of trash other than food...). pulling this off would require serious commitment from governments, organizations, and individuals, and that seems unlikely, considering that simply separating plastic bottles and cans from trash already seems to be an incredibly difficult task for many people...
      • Re:Non-cycle? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by txoof ( 553270 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @08:52AM (#33793756) Homepage

        In Norway we have plastic, glass, metal, electronic, paper and food scrap recycling and it's pretty popular. I think most everyone just does it because it's the 'right thing' to do. It doesn't hurt that there's curbside for most of it.

        • Here (California) it varies widely depending on where you are. In the town where I live, we have one container for metals, plastics, and glass, and one for paper (used to have separate containers for metals, glass, plastic, and paper, but they consolidated). Green waste gets picked up separately (no container, you just pile it on the side of the street and it gets picked up once a week), and e-waste you have to cart out to the landfill (it doesn't go into the landfill, you just take it there to drop it off

          • by mlts ( 1038732 ) *

            Here in Texas, we have single stream recycling, where everything recyclable gets put into one bin, then gets separated out at the plant. Austin, Dallas, and Houston all have this, and for two out of the three cities, it actually turns a profit. The third city signed a really poor contract with three times the processing fees as the other two cities, otherwise it would actually be receiving a check from the recycler as well.

        • by geekoid ( 135745 )

          Do you meant ehya re actually recycled? or do you mean they are put in a box for recycling and then taken away?

          As recycling gets more and more 'wider', the cost of centralizing the separation becomes better then doing it at the curb.

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by txoof ( 553270 )

            Based on the amount we pay for trash pickup, the 40% tax rate, Norwegian's compulsive honesty I'm pretty sure it's being dealt with appropriately. Every large kommune also has a bio-gas plant where a good deal of the gas-able materials go. As for the E-Waste, I don't rightly know. In the USA, a good deal of the E-Waste is just dumped in third world countries.

            But again, based on the typical Norwegian compulsive and inescapable honesty, they probably recycle the computer bits using a method that is five ti

      • what- you have something against compost?

      • Re:Non-cycle? (Score:4, Informative)

        by swb ( 14022 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @08:57AM (#33793810)

        It's really not that difficult. A waste-energy plant I have as a client already separates out glass, copper, brass, zinc, ferrous metal, and aluminum, and this is an old plant, built in the late 1980s that was really only designed to produce power plant fuel. The material separation is more about protecting the furnaces at the generating plant with a refined fuel product than recycling. I think most of the metal separation is targeted at cash value.

    • The problem (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sean.peters ( 568334 )
      While this sounds like a good idea, the problem is that segregating and storing all this stuff would be tremendously expensive (the cost of segregating recyclable materials is one of the main reasons why recycling programs have had somewhat of a checkered history). And there's no guarantee that it would ever pay off. So it would be tough to get anyone to invest in something like this.
    • by Thuktun ( 221615 )

      Eventually, if prices on these materials goes up enough, we may end up mining landfills for them.

  • Necessity... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by zrbyte ( 1666979 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @07:34AM (#33793124)
    THE most powerful driver of change.

    Sadly this is the way we overcome our big problems. Not by foresight, predictions and educated action. The shit has to start hitting the fan to get people moving in the right direction. I mean this whole rare earth situation has been foreseen. It was obvious that China was building a monopoly years ago. The same thing happens with the coming helium shortage, energy problems, global warming, you name it. It really has to get nasty for people to do something about these things.

  • Rare earths aren't really that rare. The noble gases actually live up to their family name to a much greater extent.
  • Good luck (Score:2, Funny)

    by atisss ( 1661313 )

    Let's see how they will do with rare Mars metals :)

  • by GodWasAnAlien ( 206300 ) on Tuesday October 05, 2010 @11:17AM (#33795454)

    As with everything else, reuse is most always better than recycling.

    Royalty-free standards should be created for battery shapes and connectors, and a garbage tax should be placed on non-standard batteries.

    Interchangeable parts were key to the industrial revolution. Sometimes we forget.

    • As with everything else, reuse is most always better than recycling.

      True enough

      Royalty-free standards should be created for battery shapes and connectors, and a garbage tax should be placed on non-standard batteries.

      Huh? What would this accomplish? By the time the battery is tossed, it doesn't work. So reusing it won't be of much help unless you have a particularly twisted sense of humor. Most batteries can't simply be just put back into production - remember batteries are just enclosed chemical react

  • Basically, it is insane that the west (esp. America) buys goods from China, and then pays china to take them back. Instead, it is better for us to do some R&D and build up cheaper automated recycling to get various things back

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Working...